Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 91983 invoked from network); 11 Apr 2006 06:46:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Apr 2006 06:46:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 18008 invoked by uid 500); 11 Apr 2006 06:46:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 17506 invoked by uid 500); 11 Apr 2006 06:46:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 17495 invoked by uid 99); 11 Apr 2006 06:46:01 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 23:46:01 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_FAKE_HELO_DOTCOM,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of prasenjitm@aol.com designates 152.163.225.129 as permitted sender) Received: from [152.163.225.129] (HELO omr-r01.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.129) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 23:46:00 -0700 Received: from aol.com (10.146.145.194) by omr-r01.mail.aol.com with ESMTP; 11 Apr 2006 02:45:40 -0400 Message-ID: <443B5092.5030005@aol.com> Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 12:15:38 +0530 From: Prasenjit Mukherjee User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Distributed Lucene.. - clustering as a requirement References: <39B0FB508E5D7540ACA5AD57225E150D392040@xmail.me.corp.entopia.com> <88c6a6720604061255w48c690ebyd7a2892aae772798@mail.gmail.com> <443AB8BA.6050004@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <443AB8BA.6050004@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Agreed, an inverted index cannot be efficiently maintained in a B-tree(hence RDBMS). But I think we can(or should) have the option of a B-tree based storage for unindexed fields, whereas for indexed fields we can use the existing lucene's architecture. prasen cutting@apache.org wrote: > Dmitry Goldenberg wrote: > >> For an enterprise-level application, Lucene appears too file-system and > > too byte-sequence-centric a technology. Just my opinion. The > Directory API is just too low-level. > > There are good reasons why Lucene is not built on top of a RDBMS. An > inverted index is not efficiently maintained in a B-Tree, and B-Trees > are the foundation of RDBMSes. > > http://www.haifa.ibm.com/Workshops/ir2005/papers/DougCutting-Haifa05.pdf > >> I'd be OK with an RDBMS-based Directory implementation I could take >> and use. But generally, I think the Lucene authors might like to >> take a step back and consider splitting off the repository and making >> it more extensible and high-level. Perhaps something like JSR-170 >> (Java repository API) may be a good route to go.... > > > If you have concrete ideas for an improvements to Lucene's Directory > interface, please propose them to the java-dev mailing list, ideally > as a patch. > > Cheers, > > Doug > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org