jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Kratz <eisw...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Lucene 2.9
Date Wed, 25 May 2011 16:47:05 GMT
we have 3.1 in the meantime

2011/5/25 Michael Dürig <michid@gmail.com>

> Jackrabbit recently upgraded to Lucene 3.0. See
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2415
>
> Michael
>
> On 16.8.10 22:32, Ard Schrijvers wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Alexander Klimetschek<aklimets@day.com>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 16:41, Thomas Kratz<eiswind@googlemail.com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I am new to this list and I hope I get some help. I need Jackrabbit to
>>>> run
>>>> against Lucene 2.9 as hibernate search depends on it. Do I have such a
>>>> chance when I do a build from head, is it already running against lucene
>>>> 2.9.3 ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, since 2.0 (afaik), Jackrabbit depends on Lucene 2.4.1. Not sure,
>>> but I think using a newer Lucene would require quite a few changes in
>>> Jackrabbit and further testing.
>>>
>>
>> This is correct. Lucene internal index format has also changed, so the
>> indexes itself aren't backwards compatible.
>>
>> Long story, but some day we, Jackrabbit, will need to catch up with
>> lucene to make use of all lately added features and improvements. This
>> will take however quite some changes, I'll hope to be able to invest
>> this in a couple of months
>>
>>
>>> However, Jackrabbit and Hibernate don't (shouldn't) need to use the
>>> same indexes, so you can run different versions in parallel.
>>>
>>
>> I wouldn't even know how they could :-)
>>
>> Regards Ard
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alex
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alexander Klimetschek
>>> alexander.klimetschek@day.com
>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message