On Monday, February 3, 2014 9:42:52 PM UTC, Michael Hunger wrote:
>
> Did you by chance update from 2.0-M06 to 2.0 final? Without rebuilding the 
> label store? see 
> http://blog.neo4j.org/2013/11/neo4j-200-rc1-final-preparations.html
>

Nope. I'm still using neo4j-community-2.0.0-M06.
Nevertheless, i'll try rebuilding the label data store.

Thanks!
 

>
>
>
> what happens if you run:
>
> START g=node(*) WERE g:GROUP RETURN ID(g);
>
>
>
> Caution: manual upgrade between milestones 
> Data stores created with any previous milestone version can not be used 
> with 2.0.0-RC1 unless a manual upgrade is performed. This is due to 
> incompatible changes made to the store files. Please proceed with caution, 
> backing up your data before attempting to manually upgrade. 
>
>
> Manual upgrade (only from 2.0.0-M06, and after you've backed up):
>
>    1. Cleanly shut down on the old version on Neo4j 2.0.0-M06
>    $ bin/neo4j stop
>    2. Navigate to the database directory
>    $ cd data/graph.db
>    3. Delete the label scan store (this is the critical part that has a 
>    new format). It will be recreated on startup.
>    $ rm -rf schema/label
>    4. Start with the new version of Neo4j 2.0.0-RC1
>    $ bin/neo4j start
>    
>
>
> Am 03.02.2014 um 17:52 schrieb Jorge Braz <[email protected]<javascript:>
> >:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I have two different CYPHER queries, that i believe should return the save 
> result:
>
> MATCH (g:GROUP) RETURN ID(g);
> START g=node(*) MATCH (g:GROUP) RETURN ID(g);
>
> The first query should get all nodes that have the label GROUP, while the 
> second one should select all nodes and then
> match only the nodes that have the GROUP label.
> I guess that, in theory, the node IDs returned by both queries should be 
> the same. That's not whats happening.
>
> neo4j-sh (0)$ PROFILE MATCH (g:GROUP) RETURN ID(g);
> ==> +-------+
> ==> | ID(g) |
> ==> +-------+
> ==> | 181   |
> ==> | 204   |
> ==> | 205   |
> ==> | 389   |
> ==> | 391   |
> ==> | 376   |
> ==> | 202   |
> ==> | 447   |
> ==> | 416   |
> ==> | 610   |
> ==> | 19173 |
> ==> | 393   |
> ==> | 19245 |
> ==> | 19301 |
> ==> | 19246 |
> ==> | 233   |
> ==> | 608   |
> ==> | 611   |
> ==> +-------+
> ==> 18 rows
> ==> 
> ==> ColumnFilter(symKeys=["g", "ID(g)"], returnItemNames=["ID(g)"], 
> _rows=18, _db_hits=0)
> ==> Extract(symKeys=["g"], exprKeys=["ID(g)"], _rows=18, _db_hits=0)
> ==>   Filter(pred="hasLabel(g:GROUP(18))", _rows=18, _db_hits=0)
> ==>     NodeByLabel(label="GROUP", identifier="g", _rows=18, _db_hits=0)
>
> neo4j-sh (0)$ PROFILE START g=node(*) MATCH (g:GROUP) RETURN ID(g);
> ==> +-------+
> ==> | ID(g) |
> ==> +-------+
> ==> | 181   |
> ==> | 202   |
> ==> | 204   |
> ==> | 205   |
> ==> | 233   |
> ==> | 288   |
> ==> | 292   |
> ==> | 376   |
> ==> | 389   |
> ==> | 391   |
> ==> | 393   |
> ==> | 416   |
> ==> | 447   |
> ==> | 504   |
> ==> | 505   |
> ==> | 510   |
> ==> | 511   |
> ==> | 513   |
> ==> | 515   |
> ==> | 608   |
> ==> | 610   |
> ==> | 611   |
> ==> | 19173 |
> ==> | 19245 |
> ==> | 19246 |
> ==> | 19301 |
> ==> +-------+
> ==> 26 rows
> ==> 
> ==> ColumnFilter(symKeys=["g", "ID(g)"], returnItemNames=["ID(g)"], 
> _rows=26, _db_hits=0)
> ==> Extract(symKeys=["g"], exprKeys=["ID(g)"], _rows=26, _db_hits=0)
> ==>   Filter(pred="hasLabel(g:GROUP(18))", _rows=26, _db_hits=0)
> ==>     AllNodes(identifier="g", _rows=836, _db_hits=836)
>
> Looking at the PROFILE result i can confirm that 26 nodes "
> hasLabel(g:GROUP(18))" but only 18 return when "NodeByLabel(label="GROUP"
> ".
> I'm trying to understand why this is happening but i'm stuck.
>
> It might be important to mention that these nodes are also indexed in an 
> Index called "Group". I know that something wrong happened while creating 
> the "missing"
> 8 nodes, because they also weren't properly indexes on Group Index. But i 
> was able to fix it, forcing the nodes to be added to the index. But i'm not 
> really sure 
> how to force the nodes to be labeled, because if I ask for their LABELS(), 
> they return all the correct labels.
>
> Do any of you guys have any suggestion on how should I try to tackle this 
> problem?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Neo4j" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Neo4j" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to