jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ard Schrijvers <a.schrijv...@onehippo.com>
Subject Re: full text search improvements
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:31:42 GMT
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith <mls@pooteeweet.org> wrote:
>> More over (optionally) leveraging these has several other advantages:
>
> Agreed, I think it would be great to have first-class integration from
> Oak to *both* Solr and ElasticSearch. As soon as we have a first draft
> to the indexing extension points (as described in the other thread)
> I'd love to see some prototypes on how they'd work in terms of
> external search indexes. Volunteers for that?
>
>> Now I mentioned facetting [4] above. Right now Jackrabbit does not even
>> support COUNT() [5], which I find very painful and a major oversight. But
>> really what people have come to expect from full text search is facetting.
>
> Totally agreed. We need to make sure that the Oak query API supports
> faceting and other related query features. The actual implementation
> can (should?) be left to individual index components.
>
>> 3) "cleaner" data in results
>
> This goes into the discussion of what the query result abstraction in
> the Oak API should look like. Breaking the requirement that all query
> results be directly linked to nodes in the repository should go a long
> way here, but it also opens up the issue of how such results relate
> with access controls. We need to put some thought into this...

Access controls is indeed important, and difficult.

Ard

Mime
View raw message