Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-21 Thread Mattias Persson
You should however use the IndexService interface when using indexing in neo4j. (Best implementations is probably org.neo4j.util.index.LuceneIndexService, which uses lucene http://lucene.apache.org/ as the name tells you) 2009/11/20 Laurent Laborde kerdez...@gmail.com: On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at

Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-21 Thread Laurent Laborde
Thank you. I'm planning to use lucene :) I just finished my *ugly* prototype. It seems to work as expected. Time to rewrite as if i was a real java coder :) -- Ker2x On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: You should however use the IndexService

Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-20 Thread Anders Nawroth
Hi! on the main website, when i click on Download neo4j apoc, i have a link to : http://dist.neo4j.org/neo4j-apoc-0.2.tar.gz So i click on other version and get the 0.3. Oops, thanks for pointing that out. I updated the links. I'm reading http://components.neo4j.org/neo-utils/ which is

Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-20 Thread Laurent Laborde
Meep ! Another problem with the documentation. I'm not sure to understand : http://components.neo4j.org/index-util/ // re-create an already existing index Node indexNode = //... get the underlying index node // we can pass in null as name if the index already exist (name will then

Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-20 Thread Tobias Ivarsson
Hi, These are flaws in the documentation, great that you point them out. 1. It probably should not say re-create an already existing index, but rather restore an already existing index, The old index will not be removed, it will rather be loaded again from the index-tree in the graph. 2. You

Re: [Neo] Confused about version and documention

2009-11-20 Thread Laurent Laborde
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Tobias Ivarsson tobias.ivars...@neotechnology.com wrote: Hi, These are flaws in the documentation, great that you point them out. 1. It probably should not say re-create an already existing index, but rather restore an already existing index,  The old index