lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Bridonneau <EBridonn...@epicentric.com>
Subject RE: Lucene indexer vs. DB index
Date Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:06:58 GMT
Thanks for the reply. I guess my question is also related to mails sent by
Cecil New earlier. She's trying to index simple, atomic (I mean not
tokenizable) fields unlike text fields. In this scenario I am evaluating
would I be better off using Lucene or creating a DB index of these simple
fields (some are VARCHAR types others are of numeric type) for searching
(Note Cecil that I do not question your approach)?
As a practical example has anyone benchmark a SQL statement using a '=' or
'LIKE' operator using a major DB vendor versus a Lucene Query or
WildcardQuery on atomic fields?



-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Lea [mailto:ian.lea@blackwell.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:03 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Lucene indexer vs. DB index


If your database or LDAP server gives you all the indexing you
need, with good enough performance, perhaps you don't need Lucene.
But I'm not aware of any databases that give you full text
indexing to match the power of Lucene.



--
Ian.
ian.lea@blackwell.co.uk

Emmanuel Bridonneau wrote:
> 
> Can anyone tell me the advantages of Lucene indexer for indexing data
> located in a database or LDAP server over creating another index in the
> database or from an LDAP console?
> There got to be some for indexing database records but I can't see them?
> Any light out there?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message