Github user spmallette commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/838#discussion_r201976894
--- Diff:
gremlin-core/src/main/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/process/traversal/step/branch/RepeatStep.java
---
@@ -273,11 +300,40 @@ public RepeatEndStep(final Traversal.Admin traversal)
{
super(traversal);
}
+ final LinkedList<Traverser.Admin<S>> stashedStarts = new
LinkedList<>();
--- End diff --
I had to remove `RepeatUnrollStrategy` because it adds barriers
occasionally as do other strategies - that really needs to be fixed as
something separate.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2004
I think that if you had a specific use case in mind when you started doing
this it would be cool if you did a performance test on that and shared your
results if possible.
I also think that the queries in my tests weren't really presenting
scenarios where someone would want to do DFS. I'm imaging that the only time
DFS will be used is when the user is knowledgeable and has advanced
understanding of their data to know that DFS will out perform the default. I
assume that your specific use case was falling into that scenario. As i said,
it would be nice to see that in action.
So, that said, it would be great to see DFS perform more quickly for that
case I presented for the JFRs, but that may not be an explicit requirement. It
may be more important to simply demonstrate that DFS has a use case where it
can shine.
I didn't study the JFRs for too long as the performance struck me as a
point of discussion first. If you have any thoughts to share on those
specifically, that would also be cool. Thanks again!
---
