lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tatu Saloranta <t...@hypermall.net>
Subject Re: Searching on multiple default fields
Date Wed, 14 May 2003 03:20:25 GMT
On Tuesday 13 May 2003 18:53, Kelvin Tan wrote:
> I confess that I've never quite understood the use of Field.UnStored. So
> the field is indexed but the original content is not saved?

Actually, that makes lots of sense in many cases. For example, original 
content is likely to be already stored in a database, to be accessed by 
non-search functionality, using normal SQL (etC) access. But searches are 
indexed using Lucene, because of its greater flexibility (OracleText, 
formerly known as Intermedia has similar features, but its proprietary... 
other DBs may have similar proprietary extensions). This way content won't be 
stored twice. Similarly, for web pages, pages are likely to already exist in 
the file system. Why store a duplicate in the index?

In fact I think more often than not storing content in Lucene index doesn't 
make much sense. As long as content is stored somewhere from where it can 
easily be accessed (using unique id or so), chances are that searches (not to 
mention indexing) are also faster when content is not stored, just indexed?

Just my 2 cents,

-+ Tatu +-


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


Mime
View raw message