Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of tobias382@gmail.com designates
 64.233.182.189 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=mrDtEDeY9l78p3/98nWUNnp0yZZHKUMM1mSw1XZQr2btagDpTA+qwmLkEyfI1PzkWReXdEwERhabETFtIMVaJVdsrv60ca4ojVKaW8MqegphChiD0b8LtFfQBufKyAa0UewdcNHm/zt4qzq8hdmFG8H2UL3bxZ6uM1o/YW3q3vk=
Message-ID: <55ed38ea0607040757y418aa5beo7f7e7be7b23abe8a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 09:57:23 -0500
From: "Matthew Turland" <tobias382@gmail.com>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene and database
In-Reply-To: <5e966dac0607040749o21e0d212m780e3a652e8aa069@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_20251_22508174.1152025043801"
References: <5e966dac0607040749o21e0d212m780e3a652e8aa069@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_20251_22508174.1152025043801
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're using Lucene to store IDs and
index the columns that would normally be full-text indices in MySQL, then
use the IDs to retrieve the information from the database. This is more of a
MySQL issue than a Lucene issue, but it suggests a flaw in your approach:
why not simply store all the data you want to retrieve in Lucene? If the
data in your database changes, you would have to rebuild your Lucene index
anyway. My $0.02.

On 7/4/06, Alexander Mashtakov <amashtakov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm looking for a solution/best practices concerning Lucene and SQL
> database
> integration.
> The database (MySQL) is already developed and contains data. I've tried
> MySQL full-text
> search, but it's quite slow and doesn't have the possibility to intergate
> custom analyzers.
> Phrase search is perfomed only in boolean mode and doesn't return
> relevance
> factor :(
>
> The idea is to manage full-text indexes (titles, keywords, summaries) and
> perform search
> using Lucene. The resultset will include ID's that will be appended to SQL
> query in order
> to apply additional filters based on foreign keys (categories mappings,
> etc).
>
> But, the database is going to be big enough, and the list of IDs returned
> by
> Lucene too. This
> may cause high memory usage and slow sql query speed (for instance 1000
> IDs
> in "IN (id1, id2 ...)"
> sql filter)
>
>
> Any ideas, suggestions ?
>
> --
> Thank you,
> /Alexander
>
>

------=_Part_20251_22508174.1152025043801--