Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lenya-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 36599 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2008 09:17:21 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2008 09:17:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 12413 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2008 09:17:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lenya-user-archive@lenya.apache.org Received: (qmail 12169 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2008 09:17:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@lenya.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@lenya.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@lenya.apache.org Received: (qmail 12157 invoked by uid 99); 2 Apr 2008 09:17:20 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 02:17:20 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gcclu-lenya-user@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted sender) Received: from [80.91.229.2] (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:16:36 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgz5I-0007q0-Mj for user@lenya.apache.org; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:16:44 +0000 Received: from 130.60.224.70 ([130.60.224.70]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:16:44 +0000 Received: from andreas by 130.60.224.70 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:16:44 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: user@lenya.apache.org From: Andreas Hartmann Subject: Search index scope Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:16:38 +0200 Lines: 32 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.60.224.70 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213) Sender: news X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi Lenya users, at the moment, we configure the search index per publication. It is probably possible to use the same search index across multiple publications, but I wonder if this flexibility is really necessary or could maybe be even harmful. I see the following advantages of using a common index for all publications: - Less configuration, easier maintenance. - Narrowing down the search to a single publication (or a set of publications) is easy (just add a search term), extending it beyond the index scope is (AFAIK) impossible. - The asset and link management usecases could be used to include documents from other publications. (In this case, the link URI would include the publication ID of the target to allow link resolving when rendering the page.) But maybe there are advantages of per-publication indexes that I haven't considered yet. WDYT? -- Andreas -- Andreas Hartmann, CTO BeCompany GmbH http://www.becompany.ch Tel.: +41 (0) 43 818 57 01 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@lenya.apache.org