11–20 of 34 posts
Just a warning that this is one of the modules that's licensed under the controversial "Apache 2.0 with Commons Clause" license.
More information about the Commons Clause can be found here [1]. TL;DR: May I create, distribute, offer as SaaS, and/or “sell” my products using Commons Clause licensed components? Yes. Is it open source? No. [1] https://commonsclause.com
"Fast". Compared to what? How does it perform compared to Neo4j? How do you scale it?
Just a warning that this is one of the modules that's licensed under the controversial "Apache 2.0 with Commons Clause" license.
This motivated me to reread the commons clause again. I remain so disappointed in the naming and positioning of it. If you want to sell commercial modules that is totaly fine, but Apache 2 with commons doesn’t jump off the page as an unfree license (which prima facia it is). Should be called the ‘free for personal use’ email us for pricing clause instead.
"The large print giveth, the small print taketh away".
I'm pretty uninformed on the subject, but I am interested to hear why an adjacency matrix is chosen over an adjacency list when it is sparse. My basic data structures and algorithms class would lead me to believe that an adjacency list would be better. Is this due to the nature of how the database is constructed?
The underlying representation is a sparse adjacency matrix. The graph that it is representing is not necessarily sparse.
Just a warning that this is one of the modules that's licensed under the controversial "Apache 2.0 with Commons Clause" license.
If you want an graph DB alternative that is truly Open Source (MIT/ZLIB/Apache2) try ours ( https://github.com/amark/gun ).
I'm pretty uninformed on the subject, but I am interested to hear why an adjacency matrix is chosen over an adjacency list when it is sparse. My basic data structures and algorithms class would lead me to believe that an adjacency list would be better. Is this due to the nature of how the database is constructed?