From general-return-583-apmail-lucene-general-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Fri Jan 04 13:33:10 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16825 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2008 13:33:10 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Jan 2008 13:33:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 18179 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2008 13:32:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 18156 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2008 13:32:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 18145 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jan 2008 13:32:58 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:32:58 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of tarmstrong@gmail.com designates 209.85.146.180 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.146.180] (HELO wa-out-1112.google.com) (209.85.146.180) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:32:35 +0000 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j40so11144125wah.11 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:32:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=MUkkR8IbQriNZ1c5WxSCszQ/KEgD4MYMYk/r6M/HiRU=; b=JyzizFpPRHIPPDecn5AqOWwlP0wXtUQx9EW3KLsK9JAVlp3wtrQbpmZ9vKgn4PHnc+oRgyRPxzbEltXu+wF0CB0Pfb5CcPXLU6lNv184IQUURCOaOHH0FyFgY2mmILbZbTsL0iH5v+Uyn14s5OBjtFWEbyD+xZWeUSpzV+4PoOw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=XVm3f9krj6ikaclCtttq08btWFGpUjl/oUks4BQtvtKcI8U7HyL4f6PEiAzGqhYL2360DK88Ht+CKj8gKXe+PZakKaZ/1K8jsrJzVHGSin04JXyBKTZdZ5/NXm6OplChPwKwCOQRIFALJ698JI4ljdOrTrFpfJaaURrBRkDe1ho= Received: by 10.114.197.1 with SMTP id u1mr17271021waf.61.1199453560256; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:32:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.255.19 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 05:32:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:32:40 +0100 From: "thomas Armstrong" To: general@lucene.apache.org Subject: Lucene or Sphinx? I want to search within +200,000 record tables MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi. I created a website with two +200,000 record tables cointaining information about: Table 'items' - id - title - text - tags - date - rate - user_id Table 'comments' - id - item_id - title - text - date - user_id And I would like to search within them. I created some MySQL queries but they are v-e-r-y s-l-o-w. So I'm trying to find another solution and I'm considering Lucene or Sphinx. As far as I'm concerned, Lucene would crawl and index webpages and Sphinx would build an index over the table, right? Which could be the best solution in your opinion? Thank you very much.