I like the thought for explicit cancellation, but I think that before we
get into what that would look like or how it would work, we'd need to
determine the scope of what we wanted to allow cancellation of. We have
scripts (both with and without a session) and we have bytecode based
requests. I suppose the scope could be such that we only attempted to
cancel bytecode based traversals which is what your proposal reads like.
That might be acceptable since we are trying to move folks away from
scripts. This would be another feature that makes bytecode a better choice
over scripts. Any thoughts on having some asymmetry there?
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:26 PM kARTHIK R <k4rth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> This is a followup of a SO discussion[1] with Stephen where I wanted to see
> if we can add language constructs for 1) Listing running queries 2)
> Cancelling a running query. Something straightforward would look like this:
>
> g.query() or g.Q() -> Iterator for all running queries
> g.query("132" or g.Q("123") -> project a single query
> g.query("123").cancel() or g.Q("123").cancel() -> to cancel the query
>
> Later, the same can be extended with .profile() and other statistics steps.
> Interested in hearing your thoughts.
>
> Karthik R
>
> [1]
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53053463/how-do-i-list-running-gremlin-queries-how-can-i-cancel-slow-or-long-running-que
>
