UNWIND $batch MATCH ... CREATE edge fails unless WHERE clause is used explicitly

[KwonSunJae]

ArcadeDB version: latest (Docker arcadedata/arcadedb:latest)
Protocol: Bolt (Cypher)

Rleated: #3139

Description

When performing bulk edge insertion using UNWIND + MATCH + CREATE, the following pattern fails silently or errors out:

UNWIND $batch AS e
MATCH (a:Person {id: e.src_id}), (b:Person {id: e.dst_id})
CREATE (a)-[:KNOWS {weight: e.weight, since: e.since}]->(b)

However, rewriting the same query with explicit WHERE clauses works correctly:

UNWIND $batch AS e
MATCH (a:Person)
WHERE a.id = e.src_id
MATCH (b:Person)
WHERE b.id = e.dst_id
CREATE (a)-[:KNOWS {weight: e.weight, since: e.since}]->(b)

These two forms should be semantically equivalent in openCypher. The inline property filter {id: e.src_id} should behave identically to WHERE a.id = e.src_id.

Expected behavior

Both query forms should produce the same result — matching nodes by indexed property and creating edges in bulk.

Actual behavior

The inline property filter form (MATCH (a:Person {id: e.src_id})) fails when the value references an UNWIND variable, while the WHERE form works.

[lvca]

Fixed

[KwonSunJae]

Tried UNWIND+MATCH+CREATE with inline matching — fast. But UNWIND+MATCH+WHERE+CREATE is still slow. Looks like the excluded WHERE clause.

test_edge_insert_benchmark.py::TestEdgeInsertBenchmark::test_01_bolt_individual_create 
  [BOLT individual CREATE] 10 edges in 0.12s  (83 edges/s)
**PASSED**
test_edge_insert_benchmark.py::TestEdgeInsertBenchmark::test_02_bolt_unwind_batch 
**FAILED-TIMEOUT**
test_edge_insert_benchmark.py::TestEdgeInsertBenchmark::test_03_bolt_property_match
  [BOLT property match CREATE batch=500] 10 edges in 0.07s  (137 edges/s)
**PASSED**

test 2 query

UNWIND $batch AS e
MATCH (a:BenchNode), (b:BenchNode)
WHERE a.uid = e.src AND b.uid = e.dst
CREATE (a)-[:BENCH_EDGE]->(b)

test3 query

UNWIND $batch AS e
MATCH (a:BenchNode {uid: e.src}), (b:BenchNode {uid: e.dst})
CREATE (a)-[:BENCH_EDGE]->(b)

[lvca]

Checking

[lvca]

Ok now should be fixed. Added a regression test