lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Kor <s0454...@sms.ed.ac.uk>
Subject Re: Lucene vs Derby (vs MySQL) for spatial indexing
Date Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:43:59 GMT
Quoting Andrew Boyd <andrew.boyd@mindspring.com>:

> I did a small demonstration application using lucene's range query and it
> worked fine.
> I didn't use a DB at all
>
>
> "Mosul_Iraq.html", "E043.13535"
> "Mosul_Iraq.html", "N36.33608"
>
> Having the directional (E, W, N, S) worked out well
>
> Andrew

The reason Lucene is called a search engine and not a database is because it is
optimized for text-data or data which obey zipf's law. Sure, you can use Lucene
on data that doesn't obey zipf's law, but there will be an linearly increasing
(or is it exponential?) performance cost. As you add more ordinal data
(especially floating point numbers) to Lucene, you increase the time taken for
each and every single query.


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


Mime
View raw message