I want to add property constraint on a specific vertex label to disallow null values or insertion of a vertex without specific properties
I added the name property to the person vertex as below, so the person will not take other properties except name but I need to add constraint on the value so it can not be null
mgmt = graph.openManagement()
person = mgmt.makeVertexLabel('person').make()
name = mgmt.makePropertyKey('name').dataType(String.class).cardinality(Cardinality.SET).make()
mgmt.addProperties(person, name)
mgmt.commit()
The Problem is :
A vertex with label person requires existence of a name property always. Or this vertex should not be created .
Is this achievable in janusgraph?
It is currently not possible to enforce the presence of certain property keys for certain vertex or edge labels in JanusGraph. However, this would be a good addition for the schema constraints that were introduced in JanusGraph 0.3.0. So, feel free to create an issue with JanusGraph for this feature request.
Until something like this is implemented in JanusGraph, you probably have to implement a logic to enforce this in your application that inserts the data.
If you for some reason cannot or don't want to implement this in your application (e.g. because you don't control all applications that insert data in your graph), then you could also implement your own TinkerPop TraversalStrategy that checks every addV step to ensure that the property is also added. These strategies are evaluated for all traversals and can change (e.g. as an optimization) the steps of the traversal or even throw an exception if the traversal is not legal which would be the correct behaviour in your case. JanusGraph itself would probably also implement a strategy to add these additional schema constraints.
Related
We are trying to implement Customer oriented details in Graphdb, were with a single query we can fetch the details of a customer such as his address,phone,email etc. We have build it using had address, has email edges..
g.addV('member').property('id','CU10611972').property('CustomerId', 'CU10611972').property('TIN', 'xxxx').property('EntityType', 'Person').property('pk', 'pk')
g.addV('email').property('id','CU10611972E').property('pk', 'pk')
g.addV('primary').property('id','CU10611972EP').property('EmailPreference','Primary').property('EmailType', 'Home').property('EmailAddress', 'SNEHA#GMAIL.COM').property('pk', 'pk')
g.V('CU10611972').addE('has Email').to(g.V('CU10611972E'))
g.V('CU10611972E').addE('has Primary Email').to(g.V('CU10611972EP')
This is how we have build email relation to the customer.. Similarly we have relations with Address and Phone. So right now we are using this command to fetch the json related to this customer for email,
g.V('CU10611972').out('has Email').out('has Primary Email')
And for complete Customer details we are using union for each Vertex, Phone,Emaiul and address..
Could you please suggest if there is an efficient way to query this detail?
This comes down really to two things.
General graph data modelling
Things the graph DB you are using does and does not support.
With Gremlin there are a few ways to model this data for a single vertex.
If the database supports it, have a list of names like ['home','mobile'] and use metaproperties to attach a phone number to each.
A lot of the Gremlin implementations I am aware of have chosen not to support meta properties. In these cases you have a couple of options.
(a) Have a property for 'Home' and another for 'Mobile'. If either is not known you could either not create that property or give it a value such as "unknown"
(b) Use prefixed strings such as ["Home:123456789","Mobile:123456789] and store them in a set or list (multi properties) and access them in Gremlin using the startingWith predicate. Such as g.V(id).properties('phone').hasValue(startingWith('Mobile')).value()
The properties in my graph are dynamic. That means, there can be any number of properties on the vertices. This also means that, when I do a search, I will not know what property value to look for. Is it possible in gremlin to query the graph to find all vertices that have any property with a given value.
e.g., with name and desc as properties. If the incoming search request is 'test', the query would be g.V().has('name', 'test').or().has('desc', 'test'). How can I achieve similar functionality when I do not know what properties exist? I need to be able to search on all the properties and check if any of those properties' value is 'test'
You can do this using the following syntax:
g.V().properties().hasValue('test')
However, with any size dataset I would expect this to be a very slow traversal to perform as it is the equivalent of asking an RDBMS "Find me any cell in any column in any table where the value equals 'test'". If this is a high frequency request I would suggest looking at refactoring your graph model or using a database optimized for searches such as Elasticsearch.
I am looking for an upsert functionality in Gremlin.
Client program has a stream of (personId, favoriteMovieNodeId) that need to query for the favoriteMovieNodeId's, then UPSERT a person Vertex and create the [favoriteMovie] edge.
this will create duplicate Person nodes:
g.V().has(label,'movies').has('uid',$favoriteMovieNodeId).as('fm')
.addV('Person').property('personId', $personId).addE('favMovie').to('fm')
Is there a way to check for existence of node based on properties before adding a node? I can't seem to find the documentation on this very basic graph function thats a part of every underlying graph db.
If the movie is guaranteed to exist, then it's:
g.V().has('movies','uid',$favoriteMovieNodeId).as('fm').
coalesce(V().has('Person','personId', $personId),
addV('Person').property('personId', $personId)).
addE('favMovie').to('fm')
I need to create a fairly complex rule in Drupal - I am willing to use either code or the interface to do so.
I am more familiar with the interface, however, as opposed to the Rules API.
Anyway, the rule will be as follows:
It will happen based on a form submission from entityforms (which is one entity). It will take the checkbox value of a field (not just the true or false, but rather the value submitted when a value is true or false). It will convert this number to an integer.
At this point things get interesting - I want to create a new entity of registrations (a different entity), which as far as I can tell, means I'll have to bring a registration into scope. I also need to bring node (and not just node: type and other data selectors, but specifically node) into scope, because the next step requires it.
So at this point, I should have three entities loaded into scope:
entityforms
registration
node
I believe the best way to bring registration into scope would be entity is of type? The documentation page says that content of type should be appropriate - but that seems like it might be related to the specific use case of the example - not in my more complex example where registration isn't the first entity dealt with, but rather a second.
https://drupal.org/node/1463042
So anyway, if all three of these entities is called in correctly, the ultimate result should be the following:
Value from boolean field (not the straight 1 or 0, but whatever the value to be submitted is switched to) from the entityform is converted to an integer, and inserted where entity host ID is required. In the section where host entity type is the value should be node.
I am also open to alternative suggestions if this seems overly complex or poorly architected.
The Host Entity Type cannot be of Entityform? Why be a Node since a Registration can be attached to any entity? Then you will get the id of the Entityform as also as any other fields from that entity type instead of Node. Next steps are the same.
I'm having a problem updating a disconnected POCO model in an ASP.NET application.
Lets say we have the following model:
Users
Districts
Orders
A user can be responsible for 0 or more districts, an order belongs to a district and a user can be the owner of an order.
When the user logs in the user and the related districts are loaded. Later the user loads an order, and sets himself as the owner of the order. The user(and related districts) and order(and related district) are loaded in two different calls with two different dbcontexts. When I save the order after the user has assigned himself to it. I get an exception that saying that acceptchanges cannot continue because the object's key values conflict with another object.
Which is not strange, since the same district can appear both in the list of districts the user is responsible and on the order.
I've searched high and low for a solution to this problem, but the answers I have found seems to be either:
Don't load the related entities of one of the objects in my case that would be the districts of the user.
Don't assign the user to the order by using the objects, just set the foreign key id on the order object.
Use nHibernate since it apparently handles it.
I tried 1 and that works, but I feel this is wrong because I then either have to load the user without it's districts before relating it to the order, or do a shallow clone. This is fine for this simple case here, but the problem is that in my case district might appear several more times in the graph. Also it seems pointless since I have the objects so why not let me connected them and update the graph. The reason I need the entire graph for the order, is that I need to display all the information to the user. So since I got all the objects why should I need to either reload or shallow clone it to get this to work?
I tried using STE but I ran in to the same problem, since I cannot attach an object to a graph loaded by another context. So I am back at square 1.
I would assume that this is a common problem in anything but tutorial code. Yet, I cannot seem to find any good solution to this. Which makes me think that either I do not under any circumstance understand using POCOs/EF or I suck at using google to find an answer to this problem.
I've bought both of the "Programming Entity Framework" books from O'Reilly by Julia Lerman but cannot seem to find anything to solve my problem in those books either.
Is there anyone out there who can shed some light on how to handle graphs where some objects might be repeated and not necessarily loaded from the same context.
The reason why EF does not allow to have two entities with the same key being attached to a context is that EF cannot know which one is "valid". For example: You could have two District objects in your object graph, both with a key Id = 1, but the two have different Name property values. Which one represents the data that have to be saved to the database?
Now, you could say that it doesn't matter if both objects haven't changed, you just want to attach them to a context in state Unchanged, maybe to establish a relationship to another entity. It is true in this special case that duplicates might not be a problem. But I think, it is simply too complex to deal with all situations and different states the objects could have to decide if duplicate objects are causing ambiguities or not.
Anyway, EF implements a strict identity mapping between object reference identity and key property values and just doesn't allow to have more than one entity with a given key attached to a context.
I don't think there is a general solution for this kind of problem. I can only add a few more ideas in addition to the solutions in your question:
Attach the User to the context you are loading the order in:
context.Users.Attach(user); // attaches user AND user.Districts
var order = context.Orders.Include("Districts")
.Single(o => o.Id == someOrderId);
// because the user's Districts are attached, no District with the same key
// will be loaded again, EF will use the already attached Districts to
// populate the order.Districts collection, thus avoiding duplicate Districts
order.Owner = user;
context.SaveChanges();
// it should work without exception
Attach only the entities to the context you need in order to perform a special update:
using (var context = new MyContext())
{
var order = new Order { Id = order.Id };
context.Orders.Attach(order);
var user = new User { Id = user.Id };
context.Users.Attach(user);
order.Owner = user;
context.SaveChanges();
}
This would be enough to update the Owner relationship. You would not need the whole object graph for this procedure, you only need the correct primary key values of the entities the relationship has to be created for. It doesn't work that easy of course if you have more changes to save or don't know what exactly could have been changed.
Don't attach the object graph to the context at all. Instead load new entities from the database that represent the object graph currently stored in the database. Then update the loaded graph with your detached object graph and save the changes applied to the loaded (=attached) graph. An example of this procedure is shown here. It is safe and a very general pattern (but not generic) but it can be very complex for complex object graphs.
Traverse the object graph and replace the duplicate objects by a unique one, for example just the first one with type and key you have found. You could build a dictionary of unique objects that you lookup to replace the duplicates. An example is here.