lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kevin L. Cobb" <kevin.c...@emergint.com>
Subject RE: Opinions: Using Lucene as a thin database
Date Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:38:23 GMT
I don't have the requirement to do range type select, i.e. the only
operator I would need is the equals. Select * from MY_TABLE where
MY_NUMERIC_FIELD = 80.

My fields that are searchable in my model are always type KEYWORD. I
believe this forces the match to be exact. So thinking about it in
anything other than "equals" terms, I believe, would be a mistake. 

In any case, I believe that the requirement to use Lucene as a "thin DB"
means that your requirements for your database select are fairly simple
and straightforward. 

KLCobb

 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Akmal Sarhan [mailto:as@byteaction.de] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 10:24 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Opinions: Using Lucene as a thin database

that sounds very interesting but how do you handle queries like
select * from MY_TABLE where MY_NUMERIC_FIELD > 80

as far as I know you have only the range query so you will have to say

my_numeric_filed:[80 TO ??]
but this would not work in the a/m example or am I missing something?

regards

Akmal
Am Di, den 14.12.2004 schrieb Praveen Peddi um 16:07:
> Even we use lucene for similar purpose except that we index and store
quite 
> a few fields. Infact I also update partial documents as people
suggested. I 
> store all the indexed fields so I don't have to build the whole
document 
> again while updating partial document. The reason we do this is due to
the 
> speed. I found the lucene search on a millions objects is 4 to 5 times

> faster than our oracle queries (ofcourse this might be due to our
pitiful 
> database design :) ). It works great so far. the only caveat that we
had 
> till now was incremental updates. But now I am implementing real-time 
> updates so that the data in lucene index is almost always in sync with
data 
> in database. So now, our search does not goto the database at all.
> 
> Praveen
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kevin L. Cobb" <kevin.cobb@emergint.com>
> To: <lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 9:40 AM
> Subject: Opinions: Using Lucene as a thin database
> 
> 
> I use Lucene as a legitimate search engine which is cool. But, I am
also
> using it as a simple database too. I build an index with a couple of
> keyword fields that allows me to retrieve values based on exact
matches
> in those fields. This is all I need to do so it works just fine for my
> needs. I also love the speed. The index is small enough that it is
> wicked fast. Was wondering if anyone out there was doing the same of
it
> there are any dissenting opinions on using Lucene for this purpose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
> 
> !EXCUBATOR:41bf0221115901292611315!
> 


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


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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