[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3045?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17814534#comment-17814534
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-3045:
-------------------------------------------
upadhyay-prashant commented on code in PR #2475:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/2475#discussion_r1479052070
##########
gremlin-core/pom.xml:
##########
@@ -101,6 +101,16 @@ limitations under the License.
<artifactId>hamcrest</artifactId>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
+ <dependency>
Review Comment:
done
##########
gremlin-test/src/main/resources/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/test/features/filter/Range.feature:
##########
@@ -280,4 +280,16 @@ Feature: Step - range()
When iterated to list
Then the result should be unordered
| result |
- | d[29].i |
\ No newline at end of file
+ | d[29].i |
+
+ Scenario: g_V_mapXinX_limitX2X_valuesXnameX
+ Given the modern graph
+ And the traversal of
+ """
+ g.V().map(__.in()).limit(2).values('name')
Review Comment:
done
> EarlyLimitStrategy is too aggresive to promote Limit and thus causing
> incorrect results
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-3045
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3045
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.6.6
> Reporter: Prashant
> Assignee: Stephen Mallette
> Priority: Major
> Labels: easyfix
> Fix For: 3.6.7
>
>
> {code:java}
> gremlin> g.V().map(__.in().hasId('1')).limit(2).values('name')
> ==>marko{code}
> {code:java}
> gremlin>
> g.withoutStrategies(EarlyLimitStrategy).V().map(__.in().hasId('1')).limit(2).values('name')
> ==>marko
> ==>marko {code}
> Early Limit strategy pulls Limit in front of map steps. However not all map
> steps allow the cardinality of the results flowing to be same.
>
> As is shown in example above.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
