[Developers] South Carolina weirdness

[Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]]

John,

	I understand where the problem comes from, the operation I was
referring to was not in writing the data to the property, but rather,
changing the property on the schema from being non-unique to unique.  THAT
operation should fail.

	I'm hoping that the envelope parameter is a workaround for now, and
that changing the schema to have a unique property when it has data that is
not unique will fail in the future.

	If one is able to have data in a schema which doesn't conform to the
schema, it raises a serious question as to how reliable Freebase is as a
data source.


-----Original Message-----
From: developers-bounces at freebase.com
[mailto:developers-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of John Giannandrea
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 3:24 AM
To: For discussions about MQL, Freebase API and apps built on Freebase
Subject: Re: [Developers] South Carolina weirdness


Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] wrote:
> 	That is a little hokey, IMO.  Why doesn't the operation fail when
> trying to set the property to unique if you have more than one of it?

It will, if you try to write multiple values to a unique property.

The problem comes if you make a non unique property, load multiple  
values, and then change the schema to be unique.

There is a MQL envelope parameter called 'uniqueness_failure':'soft'  
which was invented to address avh's concern.
if it runs across non unique data it will return only the first  
element and log a warning on our side.

-jg

_______________________________________________
Developers mailing list
Developers at freebase.com
http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/developers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4350 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebase.com/pipermail/developers/attachments/20080605/53d02d54/attachment-0001.bin