Added whitelistNodes and blacklistNodes #796
Conversation
…iltering for path expanders.
|
The failed checks don't look related to my changes. |
| @@ -325,96 +325,4 @@ public void testCompoundLabelWorksInBlacklist() { | |||
| assertEquals("Gene Hackman", node.getProperty("name")); | |||
| }); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we have equivalent tests for the new behavior?
| return whitelistAllowedEvaluation; | ||
| if (!whitelistNodes.isEmpty()) { | ||
| // ensure endNodes and terminatorNodes are whitelisted | ||
| whitelistNodes.addAll(endNodes); |
| for (LabelMatcherGroup group : sequenceMatchers) { | ||
| group.setEndNodesOnly(endNodesOnly); | ||
| } | ||
| Evaluator endAndTerminatorNodeEvaluator = NodeEvaluators.endAndTerminatorNodeEvaluator(endNodes, terminatorNodes); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you can add multiple, individual evaluators, but then you are bound by the order and prioritization of the traversal-framework.
|
Looks good, I'll merge. But if possible please add a few tests if the new functionality is not yet covered enough. |
…iltering for path expanders. (#796)
…iltering for path expanders. (#796)
|
Just noting that the commits/functionality here didn't make it into any releases yet as of August 1 2018 |
|
Does this functionality actually work? I don't see unit tests in this diff. I also suspect this somehow broke teminatorNodes. |
|
@InverseFalcon can we see to add this to the 3.4 / 3.5 branches too, sorry that I missed it in cherry picking back then? |
|
whitelistNodes and blacklistNodes are present and working in 3.5.0.4, so they did get it, I'll check for what other versions contain the additions. As for tests, there's a new test file I added with this PR for the node filters here: If you have an example case that demonstrates a breakage with terminatorNodes, can you create a new issue for that for us to investigate? |
|
I believe the release notes are accurate, I can see proper behavior for whitelistNodes and blacklistNodes in 3.3.0.4 and 3.4.0.2, when they were first introduced. @marccelani If you were using a version after these, please create a new issue and let us know the version of Neo4j and APOC you were using, and a sample for recreating the behavior you noted. |
This finishes up node-specific filtering for path expanders.