Mailing-List: contact derby-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Discussion" <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:38:33 +0100
From: Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: Lucene integration
In-reply-to: <401215.96469.qm@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Sender: Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM
To: Derby Discussion <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Message-id: <49BA37A9.4010001@sun.com>
References: <401215.96469.qm@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)

Geoffrey Hendrey wrote:
> Would it be possible for the derby team to implement lucene support in the following way? Hook into the asynchronous replication protocol to send committed transactions to a lucene receiver. I think it is acceptable for the free text search to only "see" committed data. 
>
> Alterative to opening the protocol would be to create an abstract ReceiverServer for asynchronous data, then LuceneReceiver is just a subclass. 
>
> Thoughts? 
>
>   
Hi Geoffrey,

Thanks for moving this discussion forward. There is already some 
discussion of lucene integration and a fair amount of hand-waving in 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-472 and 
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/LuceneIntegration In particular, the 
wiki page poses 3 use-cases for this integration: loose coupling, 
moderate coupling, and tight coupling. Once we look under the hood, some 
of these use-cases may not make sense. Am I right in assuming that you 
are interested in tight-coupling?

Thanks,
-Rick