lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-3843) Add lucene-codecs to Solr libs?
Date Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:51:15 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3843?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13588507#comment-13588507
] 

Robert Muir commented on SOLR-3843:
-----------------------------------

{quote}
Have you looked at ElasticSearch? Its very tiny (20 MB alltogether), no useless analyzers
for every language on earth. If you need kumoroji, enter:

bin/plugin -install elasticsearch/elasticsearch-analysis-kuromoji

This downloads the plugin and installs it into the ES lib folder. This is how it should work,
instead of one horrible huge war file.
{quote}

But I'm not sure this is a good thing. I did some quick google searches and found:
* http://www.sentric.ch/blog/why-we-chose-solr-4-0-instead-of-elasticsearch
  "Better language support out of the box"
* http://blog.sematext.com/2012/09/04/solr-vs-elasticsearch-part-2-data-handling/
  "Apache Solr 4.0 beta has the advantage over ElasticSearch because it can handle more languages
out of the box"

I think both search servers are good for the lucene ecosystem and its not my intent to stir
up some battle about which is better.
I'm guessing that you can access all of the lucene analyzers from either one, but the *impression*
from *packaging* is that Solr
is better.

Lets not make this same mistake with codecs! 

Most users probably could care less about SPI etc (this is all implementation details). They
do care about being able to
search different languages and index their content with the appropriate data structures.

I'm happy to open an issue to refactor our build and tests to internally reflect the fact
that, using solr-core as a library for example, you dont technically need certain jars.

But can we separate this from *packaging*, at least for now? It would be depressing to me
to see articles like this that say solr has bad support for flexible indexing.
                
> Add lucene-codecs to Solr libs?
> -------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-3843
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3843
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Wish
>    Affects Versions: 4.0
>            Reporter: Adrien Grand
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 4.2, 5.0
>
>         Attachments: SOLR-3843.patch, SOLR-3843.patch, SOLR-3843.patch
>
>
> Solr gives the ability to its users to select the postings format to use on a per-field
basis but only Lucene40PostingsFormat is available by default (unless users add lucene-codecs
to the Solr lib directory). Maybe we should add lucene-codecs to Solr libs (I mean in the
WAR file) so that people can try our non-default postings formats with minimum effort?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message