Oh, that's the solution? *sigh* It's kinda hard to define other equality if you don't have more information available than just the GraphId.
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Mark Findlater < [email protected]> wrote: > Ha, you know what, whilst I have been disappeared I have had a thought and > I'm going to guess that the problem (for me) stems from not performing > equality/hash based on the graphId field and therefore ending up with a > load of nodes that are "equal" and subsequently occupy a single slot in the > set. Well I wish I'd realised that when I started, there is a lot of > behaviour to modify now! > > M > > > On Monday, 28 April 2014 14:37:30 UTC+1, Mark Findlater wrote: >> >> Sorry, I didn't see this reply! Interestingly I just came across the >> problem again, I can write a unit test, I have unit tests but it is quite a >> lot of code to reproduce, so I can trim it down. In the meantime should I >> assume that this is not a problem that anyone other than myself and Michael >> A are experiencing? >> >> Thanks, >> >> M >> >> On Thursday, 17 April 2014 05:49:10 UTC+1, Michael Hunger wrote: >>> >>> As simple mode is detached from the db you should need to save it again >>> to persist changes >>> >>> Mark could you create a unit test for that fetching/loading behavior? >>> >>> Thanks a lot >>> >>> Sent from mobile device >>> >>> Am 17.04.2014 um 02:31 schrieb Michael Azerhad <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Oh, so the problem should not be tied exclusively to Scala.. >>> >>> I don't find the root cause.. I just use a workaround: >>> >>> instead of neo4jTemplate.fetch method, I wrote a repository method to >>> fetch the whole. Not pretty, but working.. >>> >>> I would be curious too to know the exact reason of the issue.. >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 2:13:50 PM UTC+2, Mark Findlater wrote: >>>> >>>> I am interested in this too. I am using Neo4j 2.0.1 and SDN >>>> 3.0.0.RELEASE . I am experiencing the same behaviour: >>>> >>>> //When the Node is retrieved images.size() is 3 and the correct images >>>> are present. >>>> @NodeEntity >>>> public class SponsorNode { >>>> >>>> @RelatedTo(type="BRAND_IMAGE", direction=Direction.OUTGOING) >>>> @Fetch >>>> private Set<ImageNode> images; >>>> } >>>> >>>> //If I now fetch the sponsor node images.size() == 1, if I run >>>> template.fetch(images) then images.size() == 1 (but all attributes are >>>> populated). >>>> @NodeEntity >>>> public class SponsorNode { >>>> >>>> @RelatedTo(type="BRAND_IMAGE", direction=Direction.OUTGOING) >>>> private Set<ImageNode> images; >>>> } >>>> >>>> Did you find the root of your problem Michael? >>>> >>>> On Sunday, 2 February 2014 22:27:56 UTC, Michael Azerhad wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Maybe it's an incompatibility with Scala. >>>>> >>>>> I spent all day long to explain a possible reason why fetching only >>>>> returns the first collection's element. >>>>> >>>>> Could anyone confirm me this assumption: >>>>> I precise I use SDN 3.0.0-RC1 with the simple object mapping: >>>>> >>>>> *If my first action is to create and save a `Meeting` object, * >>>>> *then I don't need to save it anymore to be able to fetch the future >>>>> relationships made by adding some `Participation`s independently.* >>>>> *In other word, does fetching for last values require the Meeting >>>>> object to be saved/updated again after Participations were added?* >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, February 2, 2014 3:29:45 PM UTC+1, Michael Azerhad wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I use Scala. >>>>>> >>>>>> In my class Meeting, I have this relation: >>>>>> >>>>>> @RelatedTo(`type` = "TO", direction = Direction.INCOMING) >>>>>> var _participants: java.util.Set[Participation] = _ >>>>>> >>>>>> Participation is another node entity, linked to Meeting with an >>>>>> outgoing relationship "TO". >>>>>> >>>>>> What I do is a simple test saving firstly a Meeting, and then saving >>>>>> three distinct Participations related to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> I expect then to have a size of 3 when I do at the end of the >>>>>> process: >>>>>> neo4jTemplate.fetch(meetingRepository.findById(justSavedMeetingId). >>>>>> _participants) >>>>>> >>>>>> However, it only returns the first Participation that was linked to. >>>>>> Not the two others.... >>>>>> >>>>>> Note that it well works (size of 3 retrieved) when I add @Fetch, >>>>>> without explicitly using neo4jtemplate.fetch: >>>>>> >>>>>> @Fetch @RelatedTo(`type` = "TO", direction = Direction.INCOMING) >>>>>> var _participants: java.util.Set[Participation] = _ //works >>>>>> >>>>>> I tested it in the same transaction and in distinct transaction. >>>>>> >>>>>> Am I missed something obvious? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, February 2, 2014 3:53:54 AM UTC+1, Michael Azerhad wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My question is pretty simple: >>>>>>> May it be a normal scenario when neo4jTemplate.fetch returns ALWAYS >>>>>>> the first collection's element? (concerning a @RelatedTo collection's >>>>>>> field without any @Fetch annotation) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On the contrary, when @Fetch is placed, the whole collection is well >>>>>>> retrieved. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did a workaround by rather use a Cypher Query (annotation in my >>>>>>> repository) to load the collection, but I would like to know if this >>>>>>> scenario could be explained. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>> 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/d/optout. >>> >>> -- 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/d/optout.
