this is weird... in your example, you got the member node and piped it into
the next portion, via:
MATCH (me:Member {id: {member_id}})
WITH me, me.birth_year as birth_year
im assuming this is so that the comparison on me.birth_year and
other.birth_year can occur, without having the cross-path comp
Yes, that's true.
cross path meant from different segments of the path.
Michael
Am 21.01.2014 um 18:37 schrieb Javad Karabi :
> ah... i think i know what you mean.
> that is, that i am comparing me.birth_year, and other.birth_year, both of
> which were part of the same path, so splitting it u
ah... i think i know what you mean.
that is, that i am comparing me.birth_year, and other.birth_year, both of
which were part of the same path, so splitting it up like you did (via the
WITH me.birth_year) did the trick?
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11:31:24 AM UTC-6, Javad Karabi wrote:
>
> Mich
Michael, awesome, thank you.
just to make sure I understand correctly, in this case, when you say 'cross
path comparison',
what are the 2 paths you are referring to?
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 11:21:32 AM UTC-6, Michael Hunger wrote:
>
> Right, cross path comparisons are not yet used to short
Michael, I apologize, I will send you a copy of the query + profile too.
In my actual query, I am using a parameter of the cypher query:
WHERE other.birth_year > (me.birth_year - {age_difference_range})
AND other.birth_year < (me.birth_year + {age_difference_range})
here is the relevant prof
Right, cross path comparisons are not yet used to shortcut path-finding
so if you rewrite your query to this, it will actually filter down the paths
eagerly
MATCH (me:Member {id: 11700})
WITH me, me.birth_year as birth_year
MATCH
(me)-[ra:preferred_store]->(s)<-[rb:preferred_store]-(other)-[rc:
You will notice:
"WHERE (Property(NodeIdentifier(),cached_available(71)) == Literal(1)" in
the TraversalMatcher() portion, the very first function of the profile..
I believe that this is what is meant when the documentation says that the
WHERE clause is not done after, (therefore during) the mat
Mark, I have emailed you the query and profile for both cases.
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:55:03 AM UTC-6, Javad Karabi wrote:
>
> Mark, I would be happy to. Give me a moment and I will post them.
>
> Michael,
>
>- Kernel version
>
>neo4j-browser, version: 2.0.0
>-
>
The problem is cross-path expressions, which are not yet handled in that manner
for simple expressions that only contain a single piece of the path (node, rel)
and things that have been evaluated before (parameters, literals, previous
computations) WILL be used to shortcut the path evaluation.
Mark, I would be happy to. Give me a moment and I will post them.
Michael,
- Kernel version
neo4j-browser, version: 2.0.0
-
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:49:37 AM UTC-6, Michael Hunger wrote:
>
> Java, what version are you using?
>
> 2.0 final?
>
> Michael
>
> Am 21.01.20
Java, what version are you using?
2.0 final?
Michael
Am 21.01.2014 um 17:29 schrieb Javad Karabi :
> from what I can tell, if there where clause is ">" or "<" (as it is in the
> actual query which i am using, not in this example query...) then the WHERE
> predicate _is in fact_ a filter, appl
Javad,
Can you paste the PROFILE output for the two queries on here. In theory the
two queries should do the same thing...in practice I imagine that's not the
case!
Mark
On 21 January 2014 16:29, Javad Karabi wrote:
> from what I can tell, if there where clause is ">" or "<" (as it is in the
from what I can tell, if there where clause is ">" or "<" (as it is in the
actual query which i am using, not in this example query...) then the WHERE
predicate _is in fact_ a filter, applied _after_ the match. It looks to me
that "TraversalMatcher()" does not apply predicates which involve > or
13 matches
Mail list logo
