From lucene-dev-return-707-qmlist-jakarta-archive-lucene-dev=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org Sat Feb 09 14:13:55 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 14382 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2002 14:13:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Feb 2002 14:13:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 4697 invoked by uid 97); 9 Feb 2002 14:13:52 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 4679 invoked by uid 97); 9 Feb 2002 14:13:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Lucene Developers List" Reply-To: "Lucene Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 4668 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2002 14:13:51 -0000 Message-ID: <000001c1b174$51f4b980$0b01a8c0@168.1.8.Domainrelevanz> Reply-To: "Kelvin Tan" From: "Kelvin Tan" To: "Lucene Developers List" References: <008801c1b03f$d7a00020$0b01a8c0@168.1.8.Domainrelevanz><1013174313.20328.44.camel@linux2.superlinksoftware.com> <003701c1b169$899350a0$0b01a8c0@168.1.8.Domainrelevanz> <1013259470.20255.88.camel@linux2.superlinksoftware.com> Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 22:13:20 +0800 Organization: Relevanz Pte Ltd MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew C. Oliver To: Lucene Developers List Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 8:57 PM Subject: Re: Proposal for Lucene [snip] > > > 5. There's a JDBCDatasource for indexing a table from databases (the table > > stores metadata of the file to index. There should still be some way to > > obtain the file to index. This ties back to 3.). I really ought to provide > > an example on how to use it... > > > > What's that good for...? Wouldn't one just create an index on the > database? you can do that, but IMHO, that's not a very unified way of searching, since there are now 2 indexes on which to search. What if the data resides on more than one database? On different databases? What I tried to do was basically have Lucene handle _all_ indexing and searching... I can definitely see the pros of having the database index the data though, just didn't think it was very clean. Regards, K -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: