lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glen Newton <glen.new...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Performance of storing data in Lucene vs other (No)SQL Databases
Date Fri, 18 May 2012 15:00:34 GMT
Storing content in large indexes can significantly add to index time.

The model of indexing fields only in Lucene and storing just a key,
and then storing the content in some other container (DBMS, NoSql,
etc) with the key as lookup is almost a necessity for this use case
unless you have a completely static index (create once + never add
to).

Thanks,
Glen

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Konstantyn Smirnov
<injecteer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> apologies, if this question was already asked before.
>
> If I need to store a lot of data (say, millions of documents), what would
> perform better (in terms of reads/writes/scalability etc.): Lucene with
> stored fields (Field.Store.YES) or another NoSql DB like Mongo or Couch?
>
> Does it make sense to index and store the data separately?
>
> TIA
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Performance-of-storing-data-in-Lucene-vs-other-No-SQL-Databases-tp3984704.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
>



-- 
-
http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/
-

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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