Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4B8D4D68.7010708@gmail.com>
References: <4B8D4D68.7010708@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 10:21:41 +0100
Message-ID: <697f8381003030121v2cbf8f64ta7e42a7962711b35@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Factor out a standalone, shared analysis package for
	Nutch/Solr/Lucene?
From: Ard Schrijvers <a.schrijvers@onehippo.com>
To: general@lucene.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Uri Boness <uboness@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I disagree here. I believe Lucene still has larger install base than Solr.
> Think of Jackrabbit which uses Lucene directly and all the CMSs that use
> Jackrabbit. Think of frameworks like Compass and Hibernate Search (that use
> Lucene directly) which are used in a lot of JEE deployments around the
> world. And certainly there are a lot of large infrastructures that use
> Lucene directly as well (as in LinkedIn for example). Solr is great in what
> it does but it is certainly not everything when it comes to open source
> search or Lucene.

I have been involved in the Lucene implementations of Jackrabbit (and
before Slide). With respect to repositories (jsr-170 / jsr-283), where
the backing persistence are some database and the storage is mainly
key-value's, we use Lucene to do all relational queries (a subset of
xpath/sql is translated to Lucene queries). This custom Lucene
implementation (see [1] for overview) can imo never be replaced by
Solr afaik, the only thing it has in common with Solr is that they
both use Lucene.

I agree with Uri that Lucene has a much larger install base than Solr

Regards Ard

[1] http://jackrabbit.apache.org/index-readers.html

> Cheers,
> Uri
>