You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I believe the queries mentioned above are semantically equivalent and thus their result should be the same, since the first FOREACH is inconsequential, iterating over an empty list.
I encountered this issue when testing queries against the Neo4j 5.18.0 enterprise version in a Docker container running alpine v.3.
The query results are the same on Neo4j 5.13.0, but differ on Neo4j 5.14.0.
When testing the query against the community edition, the query results equal.
Additionally, when forcing the SLOTTED runtime, the results also equal.
It seems like the MATCH (y) clause mistakenly matches the nodes created in the last part of the UNION in the first query, as the returned node's labels match the ones of the node created there, if set.
Steps to reproduce
Run the aforementioned, semantically equivalent, queries against an empty database and observe that their results differ.
Expected behavior
The queries should result in the same behavior
Actual behavior
The query results differ
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I found a discrepancy when running two semantically equivalent queries against an empty database:
1:
Produces:
2:
Produces:
I believe the queries mentioned above are semantically equivalent and thus their result should be the same, since the first
FOREACH
is inconsequential, iterating over an empty list.I encountered this issue when testing queries against the Neo4j 5.18.0 enterprise version in a Docker container running alpine v.3.
The query results are the same on Neo4j 5.13.0, but differ on Neo4j 5.14.0.
When testing the query against the community edition, the query results equal.
Additionally, when forcing the SLOTTED runtime, the results also equal.
It seems like the
MATCH (y)
clause mistakenly matches the nodes created in the last part of theUNION
in the first query, as the returned node's labels match the ones of the node created there, if set.Steps to reproduce
Run the aforementioned, semantically equivalent, queries against an empty database and observe that their results differ.
Expected behavior
The queries should result in the same behavior
Actual behavior
The query results differ
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: