Hey Kent,
Awesome. thanks for the info. So, using gremlin, are you using some of
the other Tinkerpop technologies?
And, haha, in researching stuff this weekend, I actually saw an email
you sent to the neo4j google group about the lucene boosting issue…
I started playing around with RDF.rb , and was really impressed,
although using that doesn't give you all the stuff tinkerpop does.
b,chris.
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Kent Fitch <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> AustLit ( http://www.austlit.edu.au ) is in the early stages of a
> migration from javaServlets/xslt/oracle to java/neo4j/gremlin. The
> web version of AustLit was developed in 2000 based on FRBR with a
> strong emphasis on events realised with a topic map model, so the sql
> implementation is close to a triple-store. More information on the
> details are here: http://www.austlit.edu.au/about ,
> http://www.austlit.edu.au/about/metadata and
> http://www.austlit.edu.au:7777/DataModel/index.html ("ALEG" was the
> working name for AustLit redevelopment in 2000).
>
> Last year a decision was taken to move AustLit from a subscription
> service to open access, and from updates being performed solely by
> dedicated bibliographers and researchers (members of various AustLit
> teams distributed across Australia) to include community
> contributions, so rather than work these changes into a 12 year old
> system, it was decided to start afresh with an approach which would
> more naturally support the AustLit data model.
>
> So, we experimented with Neo4j, and were impressed with its
> performance. For example, loading our current data from Oracle into
> an empty neo4j database takes about 30 minutes (using a
> run-of-the-mill 3 year-old server), producing a graph of 14m nodes and
> 20m relationships. Performing custom indexing of this data using the
> built-in Lucene integration takes about 2.5 hours, but that's a
> function of the extensive indexing we're performing.
>
> As you'd probably expect, we do have some "issues" we're working
> through, such as
>
> - integration with Lucene is "abstracted" by the neo4j index
> interface, so it is difficult or impossible to use some native Lucene
> features. For example, boosting index nodes based on their inherent
> importance and using this boost in lucene to determine relevance
> cannot be done.
>
> - our data model is complex, and added to the requirements to version
> every node and relationship (ie, record changes, allow rollback), our
> graph traversals are correspondingly complex, but I suspect as we
> become more familar with graph traversal idioms in gremlin and cypher,
> they'll become as "normal" as sql
>
> But so far, neo4j seems fast and robust, and we're optimistic!
>
> Kent Fitch
>
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Chris Fitzpatrick
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hej hej,
>>
>> Is anyone is using neo4j in their library projects.
>>
>> If the answer is "ja", I would be very interested in hearing how it's going.
>> How are you using it?
>> Is it something that is in production and is adding value or is it
>> more a skunkworks-type effort?
>> What languages are you using? Are you using an ORM (like Rails or Django)?
>>
>> I would also be really interested in hearing thoughts, stories, and
>> opinions about the idea of using a graph db or triple store in their
>> stack.
>>
>> tack!
>>
>> b, fitz.
