Thanks guys!

Hi Jason,

if you have questions on Structr, just let me know, we're happy to help!

Best
Axel

Am 16.07.2014 23:31, schrieb Michael Hunger:
Right I agree with Tom, currently you get this in structr (even when importing Neo4j databases, e.g. from a GraphGist).

It definitely makes sense to have a feature like that.

For Neo4j this is on the roadmap too, but not in the immediate future, it's more a capacity issue :)

Am 16.07.2014 um 23:18 schrieb Tom Zeppenfeldt <t.zeppenfe...@ophileon.com <mailto:t.zeppenfe...@ophileon.com>>:

sounds like structr.org <http://structr.org/> may be something you want to look at ..




Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards



Ir. T. Zeppenfeldt
van der Waalsstraat 30
6706 JR  Wageningen
The Netherlands

Mobile: +31 6 23 28 78 06
Phone: +31 3 17 84 22 17
E-mail: t.zeppenfe...@ophileon.com <mailto:t.zeppenfe...@ophileon.com>
Web: www.ophileon.com <http://www.ophileon.com/>
Twitter: tomzeppenfeldt
Skype: tomzeppenfeldt


2014-07-16 22:28 GMT+02:00 Jason Gillman Jr. <mackdaddydie...@gmail.com <mailto:mackdaddydie...@gmail.com>>:

    I was just wondering if the ability to utilize a schema of sorts
    was on the road map.

    When I say schema, I'm thinking more along the lines of
    relational constraints.

    Let's use the following simple example.

    We have the following types of entities represented by node labels
    (:`Server`)
    (:`Switch`)
    (:`Physical Interface`)

    Then we would want to enforce the following relations (I would
    think these restrictions would seem intuitive):

    (:`Server`)-[:`Contains`]->(:`Physical Interface`)
    (:`Switch`)-[:`Contains`]->(:`Physical Interface`)
    (:`Physical Interface`)-[:`Connects`]-(:`Physical Interface`)


    Basically, to ensure data consistency without having to build it
    into an application, we would want it so that Neo4j would not
    allow, for example, a Server to connect to another Server, or a
    Switch, nor would we want to make a Physical Interface contain a
    Server.

    Is something like this in the plans? Of course the use of these
    constraints would be completely optional.

    Thanks!

    -Jason

--



--

Axel Morgner
CEO Structr (c/o Morgner UG) · Hanauer Landstr. 291a · 60314 Frankfurt · Germany
Twitter: @amorgner <https://twitter.com/amorgner>
Phone: +49 151 40522060
Skype: axel.morgner

Structr <http://structr.org> - Award-Winning Open Source CMS and Web Framework based on Neo4j Structr Mailing List and Forum <https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21forum/structr> Graph Database Usergroup "graphdb-frankfurt" <http://www.meetup.com/graphdb-frankfurt>

--
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 neo4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to