Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Once you have decided on your typing scenario, you can create one generic call back and make the parametrization declarative. A generic call back may be as thin as hooking up a prolog engine and declaratively define the different rules to be applied for you indexing scenario. Niels > From: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com > To: user@lists.neo4j.org > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:02:05 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > We manage that today using Neo. Node "types" are represented by an array > property on the node - therefore a node can be of many "types". We then > utilize relationships to provide an "implements" relationship that enables > arbitrarily deep and complex inheritance/implementation scenarios. > > My core point was that something better than "primitive type" is clearly > needed, and a "node type" is a step in the right direction. As Peter points > out, it's one. > > That said, if you make it overly complex to support every possible scenario, > then you've pretty much defeated the benefit of "auto indexing" in the first > place. The logic to decide which index to use (and the associated code > behind) could easily be as complex or more complex to maintain than > application level code. Callbacks and such are just another form of "code", > so it really doesn't seem to me to be the "auto indexing" scenario. "Auto" > indexing should be declarative, shouldn't it? > > I prefer to make the "easy stuff easy and the hard stuff possible" - and that > implies using simple, easy-to-implement and easy-to-maintain patterns for the > stuff that 95% of applications need, and API-based approaches for the other > 5%. > > > > -Original Message----- > From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On > Behalf Of Niels Hoogeveen > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:50 AM > To: user@lists.neo4j.org > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > > Rick, > I think adding a "node type" to neo4j is not a good idea. Different > applications have different typing needs. > > My own application for example, supports multiple "node types" per node, > while "node types" can be subtyped as well. > This creates a forest of types for each node, that needs to be traversed each > time the typing information of a node is requested. > Morever the INSTANCE_OF relationships are stored as and Indexed Relationship > (https://github.com/peterneubauer/graph-collections/tree/master/src/main/java/org/neo4j/collections/indexedrelationship), > > because certain types can have millions of instances. > I am certain that such a typing construct is not everybody's cup of tea and I > wouldn't want to see it formally supported in core. > Neither would I want to see support for typing constructs other than the one > I use. > Being a schemaless database is one of the strengths of Neo4J, and typing > shouldn't become part of the core distribution.That said, there are good > reasons to create different typing libraries as a layer on top of Neo4J, the > meta model component, > though in need of some attention, is one such layer. > For auto-indexing purposes, I would much rather see the addition of an > installable call back function that takes:the node, the key, the value and > the index as input and returns the value to be indexed or null if no indexing > should take place. > Niels > > > > > > From: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com > > To: chris.gio...@neotechnology.com; user@lists.neo4j.org > > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:15:08 -0700 > > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > > > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a > > node and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > > > > > - Reply message - > > From: "Chris Gioran" > > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > > each primitive category. > > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > > you
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
We manage that today using Neo. Node "types" are represented by an array property on the node - therefore a node can be of many "types". We then utilize relationships to provide an "implements" relationship that enables arbitrarily deep and complex inheritance/implementation scenarios. My core point was that something better than "primitive type" is clearly needed, and a "node type" is a step in the right direction. As Peter points out, it's one. That said, if you make it overly complex to support every possible scenario, then you've pretty much defeated the benefit of "auto indexing" in the first place. The logic to decide which index to use (and the associated code behind) could easily be as complex or more complex to maintain than application level code. Callbacks and such are just another form of "code", so it really doesn't seem to me to be the "auto indexing" scenario. "Auto" indexing should be declarative, shouldn't it? I prefer to make the "easy stuff easy and the hard stuff possible" - and that implies using simple, easy-to-implement and easy-to-maintain patterns for the stuff that 95% of applications need, and API-based approaches for the other 5%. -Original Message- From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On Behalf Of Niels Hoogeveen Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:50 AM To: user@lists.neo4j.org Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? Rick, I think adding a "node type" to neo4j is not a good idea. Different applications have different typing needs. My own application for example, supports multiple "node types" per node, while "node types" can be subtyped as well. This creates a forest of types for each node, that needs to be traversed each time the typing information of a node is requested. Morever the INSTANCE_OF relationships are stored as and Indexed Relationship (https://github.com/peterneubauer/graph-collections/tree/master/src/main/java/org/neo4j/collections/indexedrelationship), because certain types can have millions of instances. I am certain that such a typing construct is not everybody's cup of tea and I wouldn't want to see it formally supported in core. Neither would I want to see support for typing constructs other than the one I use. Being a schemaless database is one of the strengths of Neo4J, and typing shouldn't become part of the core distribution.That said, there are good reasons to create different typing libraries as a layer on top of Neo4J, the meta model component, though in need of some attention, is one such layer. For auto-indexing purposes, I would much rather see the addition of an installable call back function that takes:the node, the key, the value and the index as input and returns the value to be indexed or null if no indexing should take place. Niels > From: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com > To: chris.gio...@neotechnology.com; user@lists.neo4j.org > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:15:08 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node > and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > - Reply message - > From: "Chris Gioran" > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, > > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index > > side-by-side? > > > > Cheers, > > Aseem > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Aseem, > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > >> wrote: > >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > >> > "fulltext" index? > >> > >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > >> straightforw
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Rick, I think adding a "node type" to neo4j is not a good idea. Different applications have different typing needs. My own application for example, supports multiple "node types" per node, while "node types" can be subtyped as well. This creates a forest of types for each node, that needs to be traversed each time the typing information of a node is requested. Morever the INSTANCE_OF relationships are stored as and Indexed Relationship (https://github.com/peterneubauer/graph-collections/tree/master/src/main/java/org/neo4j/collections/indexedrelationship), because certain types can have millions of instances. I am certain that such a typing construct is not everybody's cup of tea and I wouldn't want to see it formally supported in core. Neither would I want to see support for typing constructs other than the one I use. Being a schemaless database is one of the strengths of Neo4J, and typing shouldn't become part of the core distribution.That said, there are good reasons to create different typing libraries as a layer on top of Neo4J, the meta model component, though in need of some attention, is one such layer. For auto-indexing purposes, I would much rather see the addition of an installable call back function that takes:the node, the key, the value and the index as input and returns the value to be indexed or null if no indexing should take place. Niels > From: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com > To: chris.gio...@neotechnology.com; user@lists.neo4j.org > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:15:08 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node > and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > - Reply message ----- > From: "Chris Gioran" > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, > > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index > > side-by-side? > > > > Cheers, > > Aseem > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Aseem, > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > >> wrote: > >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > >> > "fulltext" index? > >> > >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known > >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. > >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of > >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting > >> for commit time as is now. > >> > >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, > >> one > >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. > >> Not > >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) > >> > >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it > >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, > >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do > >> just that. > >> > >> cheers, > >> CG > >> > >> > Aseem > >> > ___ > >> > Neo4j mailing list > >> > User@lists.neo4j.org > >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > >> ___ > >> Neo4j mailing list > >> User@lists.neo4j.org > >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > ___ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
> > [...] "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node and > its indexing strategy(ies). Hey I'll just toss out that for us, we need multiple indexing strategies for the same node! E.g. if you have a "movie", you may want to "exact" index an "alias" or "username" (a short but human-readable ID for popular movies, like "lotr2" or "hp5") while at the same-time "fulltext" index a "title" and "description" to facilitate search. Aseem On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Rick Bullotta wrote: > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node > and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > - Reply message - > From: "Chris Gioran" > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the > future, > > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext > auto-index > > side-by-side? > > > > Cheers, > > Aseem > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Aseem, > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > > >> wrote: > >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > >> > "fulltext" index? > >> > >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known > >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. > >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of > >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting > >> for commit time as is now. > >> > >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one > exact, > >> one > >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. > >> Not > >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) > >> > >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it > >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, > >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do > >> just that. > >> > >> cheers, > >> CG > >> > >> > Aseem > >> > ___ > >> > Neo4j mailing list > >> > User@lists.neo4j.org > >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > >> ___ > >> Neo4j mailing list > >> User@lists.neo4j.org > >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > ___ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
I was merely suggesting incremental steps towards nirvana. ;-) - Reply message - From: "Peter Neubauer" Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 8:19 am Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? To: "Neo4j user discussions" But then, how about conditionals and more complex stuff like relationships connected to nodes, inferred type because of in-graph reasoning etc? Node Type as a simple String is not adding much over other recognizable patterns, and much less usable other than "crude" scenarios. If you want that, why not set a TYPE property and then (in future versions) link conditional auto-indexing to that? Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - Your high performance graph database. http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. http://www.thoughtmade.com - Scandinavia's coolest Bring-a-Thing party. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Rick Bullotta wrote: > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node > and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > - Reply message - > From: "Chris Gioran" > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: >> Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, >> we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index >> side-by-side? >> >> Cheers, >> Aseem >> >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < >> chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Aseem, >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore >>> wrote: >>> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a >>> > "fulltext" index? >>> >>> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no >>> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known >>> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. >>> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of >>> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting >>> for commit time as is now. >>> >>> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, >>> one >>> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. >>> Not >>> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) >>> >>> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it >>> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, >>> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do >>> just that. >>> >>> cheers, >>> CG >>> >>> > Aseem >>> > ___ >>> > Neo4j mailing list >>> > User@lists.neo4j.org >>> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >>> > >>> ___ >>> Neo4j mailing list >>> User@lists.neo4j.org >>> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >>> >> ___ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
But then, how about conditionals and more complex stuff like relationships connected to nodes, inferred type because of in-graph reasoning etc? Node Type as a simple String is not adding much over other recognizable patterns, and much less usable other than "crude" scenarios. If you want that, why not set a TYPE property and then (in future versions) link conditional auto-indexing to that? Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - Your high performance graph database. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. http://www.thoughtmade.com - Scandinavia's coolest Bring-a-Thing party. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Rick Bullotta wrote: > Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal > concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node > and its indexing strategy(ies). > > > > - Reply message - > From: "Chris Gioran" > Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? > To: "Neo4j user discussions" > > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: >> Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, >> we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index >> side-by-side? >> >> Cheers, >> Aseem >> >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < >> chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Aseem, >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore >>> wrote: >>> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a >>> > "fulltext" index? >>> >>> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no >>> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known >>> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. >>> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of >>> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting >>> for commit time as is now. >>> >>> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, >>> one >>> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. >>> Not >>> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) >>> >>> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it >>> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, >>> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do >>> just that. >>> >>> cheers, >>> CG >>> >>> > Aseem >>> > ___ >>> > Neo4j mailing list >>> > User@lists.neo4j.org >>> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >>> > >>> ___ >>> Neo4j mailing list >>> User@lists.neo4j.org >>> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >>> >> ___ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node and its indexing strategy(ies). - Reply message - From: "Chris Gioran" Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext? To: "Neo4j user discussions" No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for each primitive category. However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what you described (and more, actually). thanks, CG On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore wrote: > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index > side-by-side? > > Cheers, > Aseem > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > >> Hi Aseem, >> >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore >> wrote: >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a >> > "fulltext" index? >> >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting >> for commit time as is now. >> >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, >> one >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. >> Not >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) >> >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do >> just that. >> >> cheers, >> CG >> >> > Aseem >> > ___ >> > Neo4j mailing list >> > User@lists.neo4j.org >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > >> ___ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Got it, thanks. =) On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Chris Gioran < chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then! > > > >> There will still be one auto index for > >> each primitive category. > > > > Can you explain what a "primitive category" is then > > I apologize for the confusion. Primitives (or primitive categories) in > Neo4j are Nodes and Relationships. > Named so because their in-kernel classes, NodeImpl and > RelationshipImpl extend org.neo4j.kernel.impl.core.Primitive > > > Aseem > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Chris Gioran < > > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > >> No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > >> configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > >> on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > >> each primitive category. > >> However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > >> arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > >> individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > >> you described (and more, actually). > >> > >> thanks, > >> CG > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore < > aseem.kish...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the > >> future, > >> > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext > >> auto-index > >> > side-by-side? > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Aseem > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > >> > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Aseem, > >> >> > >> >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore < > aseem.kish...@gmail.com > >> > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > >> >> > "fulltext" index? > >> >> > >> >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > >> >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known > >> >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. > >> >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of > >> >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting > >> >> for commit time as is now. > >> >> > >> >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one > >> exact, > >> >> one > >> >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be > auto. > >> >> Not > >> >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) > >> >> > >> >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example > it > >> >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, > >> >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do > >> >> just that. > >> >> > >> >> cheers, > >> >> CG > >> >> > >> >> > Aseem > >> >> > ___ > >> >> > Neo4j mailing list > >> >> > User@lists.neo4j.org > >> >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> >> > > >> >> ___ > >> >> Neo4j mailing list > >> >> User@lists.neo4j.org > >> >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> >> > >> > ___ > >> > Neo4j mailing list > >> > User@lists.neo4j.org > >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > >> ___ > >> Neo4j mailing list > >> User@lists.neo4j.org > >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > ___ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Aseem Kishore wrote: > Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then! > >> There will still be one auto index for >> each primitive category. > > Can you explain what a "primitive category" is then I apologize for the confusion. Primitives (or primitive categories) in Neo4j are Nodes and Relationships. Named so because their in-kernel classes, NodeImpl and RelationshipImpl extend org.neo4j.kernel.impl.core.Primitive > Aseem > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Chris Gioran < > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > >> No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to >> configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying >> on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for >> each primitive category. >> However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an >> arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for >> individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what >> you described (and more, actually). >> >> thanks, >> CG >> >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore >> wrote: >> > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the >> future, >> > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext >> auto-index >> > side-by-side? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Aseem >> > >> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < >> > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Aseem, >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > > >> >> wrote: >> >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a >> >> > "fulltext" index? >> >> >> >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no >> >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known >> >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. >> >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of >> >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting >> >> for commit time as is now. >> >> >> >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one >> exact, >> >> one >> >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. >> >> Not >> >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) >> >> >> >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it >> >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, >> >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do >> >> just that. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> CG >> >> >> >> > Aseem >> >> > ___ >> >> > Neo4j mailing list >> >> > User@lists.neo4j.org >> >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> >> > >> >> ___ >> >> Neo4j mailing list >> >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> >> >> > ___ >> > Neo4j mailing list >> > User@lists.neo4j.org >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > >> ___ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then! > There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. Can you explain what a "primitive category" is then Aseem On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Chris Gioran < chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to > configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying > on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for > each primitive category. > However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an > arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for > individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what > you described (and more, actually). > > thanks, > CG > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the > future, > > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext > auto-index > > side-by-side? > > > > Cheers, > > Aseem > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Aseem, > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > > >> wrote: > >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > >> > "fulltext" index? > >> > >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known > >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. > >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of > >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting > >> for commit time as is now. > >> > >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one > exact, > >> one > >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. > >> Not > >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) > >> > >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it > >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, > >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do > >> just that. > >> > >> cheers, > >> CG > >> > >> > Aseem > >> > ___ > >> > Neo4j mailing list > >> > User@lists.neo4j.org > >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > >> ___ > >> Neo4j mailing list > >> User@lists.neo4j.org > >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > >> > > ___ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for each primitive category. However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an arbitrary number of auto indexes, each of which will allow for individual configuration. So, when that comes along you will have what you described (and more, actually). thanks, CG On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aseem Kishore wrote: > Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, > we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index > side-by-side? > > Cheers, > Aseem > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < > chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > >> Hi Aseem, >> >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore >> wrote: >> > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a >> > "fulltext" index? >> >> Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no >> straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known >> shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. >> Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of >> changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting >> for commit time as is now. >> >> > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, >> one >> > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. >> Not >> > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) >> >> Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it >> is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, >> however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do >> just that. >> >> cheers, >> CG >> >> > Aseem >> > ___ >> > Neo4j mailing list >> > User@lists.neo4j.org >> > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > >> ___ >> Neo4j mailing list >> User@lists.neo4j.org >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future, we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index side-by-side? Cheers, Aseem On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran < chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > Hi Aseem, > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore > wrote: > > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > > "fulltext" index? > > Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no > straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known > shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. > Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of > changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting > for commit time as is now. > > > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, > one > > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. > Not > > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) > > Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it > is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, > however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do > just that. > > cheers, > CG > > > Aseem > > ___ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Hi Aseem, On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore wrote: > Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a > "fulltext" index? Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known shortcoming and will be remedied pretty soon. Another addition that is coming, by the way, is the visibility of changes of the auto index within the transaction, instead of waiting for commit time as is now. > (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, one > full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. Not > sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) Well, a lot of use cases call for manual indexing, when for example it is conditional or the use of multiple indexes is required. If, however, auto indexing covers all your needs then by all means, do just that. cheers, CG > Aseem > ___ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
[Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a "fulltext" index? (Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, one full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. Not sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.) Aseem ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
