Over a million developers have joined DZone.
{{announcement.body}}
{{announcement.title}}

Neo4j & Cypher: UNWIND vs FOREACH

DZone's Guide to

Neo4j & Cypher: UNWIND vs FOREACH

· Java Zone
Free Resource

Microservices! They are everywhere, or at least, the term is. When should you use a microservice architecture? What factors should be considered when making that decision? Do the benefits outweigh the costs? Why is everyone so excited about them, anyway?  Brought to you in partnership with IBM.

I’ve written a couple of posts about the new UNWIND clause in Neo4j’s cypher query language, but I forgot about my favorite use of UNWIND, which is to get rid of some uses of FOREACH from our queries.

Let’s say we’ve created a timetree up front and now have a series of events coming in that we want to create in the database and attach to the appropriate part of the timetree.

Before UNWIND existed we might try to write the following query using FOREACH:

WITH [{name: "Event 1", timetree: {day: 1, month: 1, year: 2014}}, 
      {name: "Event 2", timetree: {day: 2, month: 1, year: 2014}}] AS events
FOREACH (event IN events | 
  CREATE (e:Event {name: event.name})
  MATCH (year:Year {year: event.timetree.year }), 
        (year)-[:HAS_MONTH]->(month {month: event.timetree.month }),
        (month)-[:HAS_DAY]->(day {day: event.timetree.day })
  CREATE (e)-[:HAPPENED_ON]->(day))

Unfortunately we can’t use MATCH inside a FOREACH statement so we’ll get the following error:

Invalid use of MATCH inside FOREACH (line 5, column 3)
"  MATCH (year:Year {year: event.timetree.year }), "
   ^
Neo.ClientError.Statement.InvalidSyntax

We can work around this by using MERGE instead in the knowledge that it’s never going to create anything because the timetree already exists:

WITH [{name: "Event 1", timetree: {day: 1, month: 1, year: 2014}}, 
      {name: "Event 2", timetree: {day: 2, month: 1, year: 2014}}] AS events
FOREACH (event IN events | 
  CREATE (e:Event {name: event.name})
  MERGE (year:Year {year: event.timetree.year })
  MERGE (year)-[:HAS_MONTH]->(month {month: event.timetree.month })
  MERGE (month)-[:HAS_DAY]->(day {day: event.timetree.day })
  CREATE (e)-[:HAPPENED_ON]->(day))

If we replace the FOREACH with UNWIND we’d get the following:

WITH [{name: "Event 1", timetree: {day: 1, month: 1, year: 2014}}, 
      {name: "Event 2", timetree: {day: 2, month: 1, year: 2014}}] AS events
UNWIND events AS event
CREATE (e:Event {name: event.name})
WITH e, event.timetree AS timetree
MATCH (year:Year {year: timetree.year }), 
      (year)-[:HAS_MONTH]->(month {month: timetree.month }),
      (month)-[:HAS_DAY]->(day {day: timetree.day })
CREATE (e)-[:HAPPENED_ON]->(day)

Although the lines of code has slightly increased the query is now correct and we won’t accidentally correct new parts of our time tree.

We could also pass on the event that we created to the next part of the query which wouldn’t be the case when using FOREACH.

Discover how the Watson team is further developing SDKs in Java, Node.js, Python, iOS, and Android to access these services and make programming easy. Brought to you in partnership with IBM.

Topics:

Published at DZone with permission of Mark Needham, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

THE DZONE NEWSLETTER

Dev Resources & Solutions Straight to Your Inbox

Thanks for subscribing!

Awesome! Check your inbox to verify your email so you can start receiving the latest in tech news and resources.

X

{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}