Errors and deprecations for graph references #340
Conversation
| @@ -1246,8 +1246,10 @@ To continue using it, escape the identifier by adding backticks around the ident | |||
| To continue using it, escape the identifier by adding backticks around the identifier `%s`. | |||
| - label:new[Valid for Neo4j 5.5-5.25] All subqueries in a UNION [ALL] should have the same ordering for the return columns. | |||
| Using differently ordered return items in a UNION [ALL] clause is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. | |||
| - Databases and aliases with unescaped `.` are deprecated unless to indicate that they belong to a composite database. | |||
| - label:new[Valid for Neo4j 5.26-2025.05] Databases and aliases with unescaped `.` are deprecated unless to indicate that they belong to a composite database. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I reused the format of the label from the entry above, but that is not visible in the published docs of some reason
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand this label? What do we mean by "valid" here? I almost feel like we need a "incorrectly deprecated" flag...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we can discuss this comment together with @renetapopova later in the week (Lasse is out today) as I just copied it from an already existing similar place
| @@ -1246,8 +1246,10 @@ To continue using it, escape the identifier by adding backticks around the ident | |||
| To continue using it, escape the identifier by adding backticks around the identifier `%s`. | |||
| - label:new[Valid for Neo4j 5.5-5.25] All subqueries in a UNION [ALL] should have the same ordering for the return columns. | |||
| Using differently ordered return items in a UNION [ALL] clause is deprecated and will be removed in a future version. | |||
| - Databases and aliases with unescaped `.` are deprecated unless to indicate that they belong to a composite database. | |||
| - label:new[Valid for Neo4j 5.26-2025.05] Databases and aliases with unescaped `.` are deprecated unless to indicate that they belong to a composite database. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand this label? What do we mean by "valid" here? I almost feel like we need a "incorrectly deprecated" flag...
| <<_graph_reference_deprecation>> | ||
|
|
||
| <<_graph_reference_deprecation_use>> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These links seem to not work either, even though they are to the same page 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting, I can see they do not work in the preview on the PR, however they do work in the Intellij ascii doc preview. Perhaps someone from docs team can figure out what I have done wrongly...
- Mention parameters as the recommended approach - Change example to use CREATE ALIAS instead of CREATE DATABASE - Make it clearer which example queries only applies to Cypher 25
…ublished in 2025.06)
|
This PR includes documentation updates New pages: Updated pages: |
see also: neo4j/docs-status-codes#340 --------- Co-authored-by: Jens Pryce-Åklundh <112686610+JPryce-Aklundh@users.noreply.github.com>
see also: neo4j/docs-status-codes#340 --------- Co-authored-by: Jens Pryce-Åklundh <112686610+JPryce-Aklundh@users.noreply.github.com>
The errors have already been merged. The deprecations come from https://github.com/neo-technology/neo4j/pull/31541