You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tinkerpop.apache.org by Daniel Kuppitz <me...@gremlin.guru> on 2018/09/12 18:20:55 UTC
[DISCUSS] Uniqueness of property ids
Right now we don't enforce uniqueness of property ids, which can lead to
very weird results:
gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'foo', 'bar', id, 1).property(single,
'bar', 'baz', id, 1)
==>v[0]
gremlin> g.V().properties().hasId(1)
==>vp[bar->baz]
==>vp[bar->baz]
If we allow users to manually specify property ids, the above query should
throw an exception.
IMO, local uniqueness should be enough (given alone the complexity it would
require to ensure global uniqueness).
Thoughts? Objections? More/other suggestions?
Cheers,
Daniel
Re: [DISCUSS] Uniqueness of property ids
Posted by Robert Dale <ro...@gmail.com>.
When you say 'local', do you mean local to VertexProperty IDs only as
opposed to 'global' including Vertex IDs and Edge IDs?
Robert Dale
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:29 AM Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I probably should have added this yesterday when I replied but +1 to local
> uniqueness for vertex property identifiers. kinda surprised that we didn't
> have this enforced already in the test suite.
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:14 PM Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > that much actually makes sense - the problem is the TinkerGraph default
> > configuration and Java Number Brain Damage
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:12 PM Robert Dale <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Very strange indeed...
> >>
> >> gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
> >> ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
> >> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','marko')
> >> ==>v[0]
> >> gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'name', 'stephen', id, 4L)
> >> ==>v[2]
> >> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','daniel')
> >> ==>v[3]
> >> gremlin> g.V().valueMap(true)
> >> ==>[id:0,label:vertex,name:[marko]]
> >> ==>[id:2,label:vertex,name:[stephen]]
> >> ==>[id:3,label:vertex,name:[daniel]]
> >> gremlin> g.V().properties().valueMap(true)
> >> ==>[id:1,key:name,value:marko]
> >> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
> >> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
> >>
> >> v3.3.3
> >>
> >> Robert Dale
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:21 PM Daniel Kuppitz <me...@gremlin.guru> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Right now we don't enforce uniqueness of property ids, which can lead
> to
> >> > very weird results:
> >> >
> >> > gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
> >> > ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
> >> > gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'foo', 'bar', id,
> 1).property(single,
> >> > 'bar', 'baz', id, 1)
> >> > ==>v[0]
> >> > gremlin> g.V().properties().hasId(1)
> >> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
> >> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > If we allow users to manually specify property ids, the above query
> >> should
> >> > throw an exception.
> >> >
> >> > IMO, local uniqueness should be enough (given alone the complexity it
> >> would
> >> > require to ensure global uniqueness).
> >> >
> >> > Thoughts? Objections? More/other suggestions?
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Daniel
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Uniqueness of property ids
Posted by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>.
I probably should have added this yesterday when I replied but +1 to local
uniqueness for vertex property identifiers. kinda surprised that we didn't
have this enforced already in the test suite.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:14 PM Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> that much actually makes sense - the problem is the TinkerGraph default
> configuration and Java Number Brain Damage
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:12 PM Robert Dale <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Very strange indeed...
>>
>> gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
>> ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
>> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','marko')
>> ==>v[0]
>> gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'name', 'stephen', id, 4L)
>> ==>v[2]
>> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','daniel')
>> ==>v[3]
>> gremlin> g.V().valueMap(true)
>> ==>[id:0,label:vertex,name:[marko]]
>> ==>[id:2,label:vertex,name:[stephen]]
>> ==>[id:3,label:vertex,name:[daniel]]
>> gremlin> g.V().properties().valueMap(true)
>> ==>[id:1,key:name,value:marko]
>> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
>> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
>>
>> v3.3.3
>>
>> Robert Dale
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:21 PM Daniel Kuppitz <me...@gremlin.guru> wrote:
>>
>> > Right now we don't enforce uniqueness of property ids, which can lead to
>> > very weird results:
>> >
>> > gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
>> > ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
>> > gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'foo', 'bar', id, 1).property(single,
>> > 'bar', 'baz', id, 1)
>> > ==>v[0]
>> > gremlin> g.V().properties().hasId(1)
>> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
>> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
>> >
>> >
>> > If we allow users to manually specify property ids, the above query
>> should
>> > throw an exception.
>> >
>> > IMO, local uniqueness should be enough (given alone the complexity it
>> would
>> > require to ensure global uniqueness).
>> >
>> > Thoughts? Objections? More/other suggestions?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Daniel
>> >
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Uniqueness of property ids
Posted by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>.
that much actually makes sense - the problem is the TinkerGraph default
configuration and Java Number Brain Damage
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:12 PM Robert Dale <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Very strange indeed...
>
> gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
> ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','marko')
> ==>v[0]
> gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'name', 'stephen', id, 4L)
> ==>v[2]
> gremlin> g.addV().property('name','daniel')
> ==>v[3]
> gremlin> g.V().valueMap(true)
> ==>[id:0,label:vertex,name:[marko]]
> ==>[id:2,label:vertex,name:[stephen]]
> ==>[id:3,label:vertex,name:[daniel]]
> gremlin> g.V().properties().valueMap(true)
> ==>[id:1,key:name,value:marko]
> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
> ==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
>
> v3.3.3
>
> Robert Dale
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:21 PM Daniel Kuppitz <me...@gremlin.guru> wrote:
>
> > Right now we don't enforce uniqueness of property ids, which can lead to
> > very weird results:
> >
> > gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
> > ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
> > gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'foo', 'bar', id, 1).property(single,
> > 'bar', 'baz', id, 1)
> > ==>v[0]
> > gremlin> g.V().properties().hasId(1)
> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
> > ==>vp[bar->baz]
> >
> >
> > If we allow users to manually specify property ids, the above query
> should
> > throw an exception.
> >
> > IMO, local uniqueness should be enough (given alone the complexity it
> would
> > require to ensure global uniqueness).
> >
> > Thoughts? Objections? More/other suggestions?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Uniqueness of property ids
Posted by Robert Dale <ro...@gmail.com>.
Very strange indeed...
gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
gremlin> g.addV().property('name','marko')
==>v[0]
gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'name', 'stephen', id, 4L)
==>v[2]
gremlin> g.addV().property('name','daniel')
==>v[3]
gremlin> g.V().valueMap(true)
==>[id:0,label:vertex,name:[marko]]
==>[id:2,label:vertex,name:[stephen]]
==>[id:3,label:vertex,name:[daniel]]
gremlin> g.V().properties().valueMap(true)
==>[id:1,key:name,value:marko]
==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
==>[id:4,key:name,value:stephen]
v3.3.3
Robert Dale
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:21 PM Daniel Kuppitz <me...@gremlin.guru> wrote:
> Right now we don't enforce uniqueness of property ids, which can lead to
> very weird results:
>
> gremlin> g = TinkerGraph.open().traversal()
> ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:0 edges:0], standard]
> gremlin> g.addV().property(single, 'foo', 'bar', id, 1).property(single,
> 'bar', 'baz', id, 1)
> ==>v[0]
> gremlin> g.V().properties().hasId(1)
> ==>vp[bar->baz]
> ==>vp[bar->baz]
>
>
> If we allow users to manually specify property ids, the above query should
> throw an exception.
>
> IMO, local uniqueness should be enough (given alone the complexity it would
> require to ensure global uniqueness).
>
> Thoughts? Objections? More/other suggestions?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>