jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lukas Kahwe Smith <sm...@pooteeweet.org>
Subject Re: Elastic Search and OAK comparisons
Date Wed, 18 Dec 2013 09:25:20 GMT

On Dec 18, 2013, at 10:16 , Ian Boston <ieb@tfd.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 17 December 2013 22:43, Reza Jalili <jalili@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Forwarding to the open group
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Toby,
>>> 
>>> I've just started to take a look at elasticsearch.org / .com
>>> 
>>> Do you know:
>>> How does oak compare with elasticsearch open source
>>> search/data store?
> 
> Elastic search is only a distributed elastic search index based on
> Lucene, so comparing it with Oak as a whole is not  a like for like
> comparison. It is not a data store.

From what I gather ElasticSearch core devs are no longer opposing the idea of people using
ES as a data store.

> However:
> Many large applications especially in the OpenData field have used it
> as a data store since its resilience to unforeseen failures is high
> mainly due to:
> * close to real time with a data update latency often around 50ms
> between update and availability in the index.
> * replication and sharding with no single point of failure
> * write ahead log on write giving it automated recovery.
> * True elasticity.
> 
> The datastore that results from an elastic search deployment can be
> considered as a flat datastore with no inherent structure and no
> versioning. ie billions of documents in a bucket.

Right .. ES can work as a document data store, but it lacks the CMS specific capabilities
of JCR like versioning, ACLs, tree structure, native support for references etc.

> If you were brave, you could write a EasticSearchMK.

Indeed this would be great! One of the biggest deficiencies with JCR/Jackrabbit is the lack
for facetted search. Oak at least makes the search indexer pluggable and afaik there is work
being done to write a Solr plugin for Oak. Once you have the data in Solr (or ElasticSearch)
I envision it should be possible to write queries directed at them including facetting. However
then one will obviously loose all the CMS capabilities I mentioned above. Might be cool if
someone would provide some plugin specific tools to easily create build a facetted search
query that still takes into account ACLs and the tree structure.

regards,
Lukas Kahwe Smith
smith@pooteeweet.org




Mime
View raw message