Example: Today I call them "cars", but tomorrow I simply want to call them "deprecatedTransporationVehicles". If I have used an integral "type-id", I can make this change trivially at the display level. If I have used strings, I cannot...
-----Original Message----- From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On Behalf Of Achim 'ahzf' Friedland Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 1:44 PM To: Neo4j user discussions Subject: Re: [Neo4j] First-class "type" property on relationships but not nodes; why? Am 05.05.2011 19:19, schrieb Rick Bullotta: > In general, I think it's a good idea to avoid strings as "types" for a whole > host of reasons (performance, future renaming/refactoring, etc.). Having type-ids for performance reasons instead of type-strings is okay, but because of future renaming/refactoring?!? What will you do when you have two seperate (semantic web) graphs on seperate machines and now one of the graphs moves to the other machine? Do you sync/renumber the type-ids of one of the graphs? Or do you support two Ids for the same type-string? I think this problem is today in the linked data area more important than supporting someone who just want's to change the name of some vertices/edge types. For this we could always use MapReduce (without the reduce of course ;). In the end having type-strings or better type-URIs is slow but the only real future-proof solution ;) Cheers... Achim _______________________________________________ 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
