Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 98133 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2007 21:50:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Oct 2007 21:50:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 74012 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 2007 21:50:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 73982 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 2007 21:50:34 -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 73971 invoked by uid 99); 7 Oct 2007 21:50:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 14:50:34 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.69.42.181] (HELO radix.cryptio.net) (208.69.42.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 21:50:36 +0000 Received: by radix.cryptio.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 01FB871C0D3; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by radix.cryptio.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0017C71C0BA for ; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:50:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:50:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Hostetter To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Group of documents. In-Reply-To: <1e68ba6b0710052020p7dde2ffao291fcaf81161be6f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <1e68ba6b0710052020p7dde2ffao291fcaf81161be6f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org : The only solution that we have in our minds now is to have two indexes one : for articles and one for feeds. There are two problems with this approach : 1) redundancy this isn't really a "problem" a lucene index is designed to make searching fast, not to be a normalized data store -- there are lots of little redundencies inside of a lucene index to make searching faster, you're just talking about adding one higher up. alterntately you could just have an index of articles and when you want to "search for a feed" you would scan through every matching article to build a list of matching feeds. this would be less "redundent" but it would also probably be slower. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org