Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31763 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2008 10:55:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Aug 2008 10:55:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 69793 invoked by uid 500); 27 Aug 2008 10:55:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 69760 invoked by uid 500); 27 Aug 2008 10:55:01 -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 69749 invoked by uid 99); 27 Aug 2008 10:55:01 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:55:01 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:54:03 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KYIfY-0001PU-A4 for java-user@lucene.apache.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:54:32 -0700 Message-ID: <19178616.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:54:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "Karsten F." To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Index types In-Reply-To: <19177298.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: karsten-lucene@fiz-technik.de References: <19177298.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi John, about "integration other index implementation": Sounds like you need a DBMS with some lucene features. There was a post about using lucene in Oracle: http://www.nabble.com/Using-lucene-as-a-database...-good-idea-or-bad-idea--to18703473.html#a18741137 and http://www.nabble.com/Oracle-and-Lucene-Integration-to7501262.html#a7501262 But normaly for a particular problem there is a solution with lucene (example: you should not index timestamps in lucene, but you can A) index year, month and day or B) generate your own filter which used the (cached) timestamp from a stored field or C) use solr (which contains timestamp-range implementation out of the box). Best regards Karsten John Patterson wrote: > > Hi, I know that Lucene uses an inverted index which makes range queries > and great-than/less-than type queries very slow for continuous data types > like times, latitude, etc. Last time I looked they were converted into > huge OR queries and so had a maximum clause limit. > > I was wondering if any work had been done on integrating other index > implementations? > > Thanks, > > John > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Index-types-tp19177298p19178616.html Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org