lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org>
Subject Re: spatial queries
Date Wed, 23 Aug 2006 07:24:53 GMT

: thanks for the answer, I am also interested in the jdbc connectivity.

Sorry, i thought that was and "if not" clause on your question.

I've heard of some attempts at extending Lucene's "Directory" with a RDBMS
backed implimentation -- from what i'm told they tend to focus on modeling
lucene files as rows, which isn't really what people tend to be looking
for when they ask about keeping a lucene index in a database -- people
typically want to be able to do lucene queries and do relational queries
at the same time; or as i like to call it: "eat their cake and eat and
eat an upside down cake that was made from the same two eggs".  By which i
mean that since Lucene is an inverted index it approaches data from an
"upside down" perspective compared to the way an RDBMS application would
-- so sharing a single view of the data doesn't seem like it would work
very well.

: I think my concern wit the rangeset query is that there wouldn't be an
: index for the rangeset, and as such wouldn't scale.

That sounds like a RDBMS way of thinking -- not a an inverted index way of
thinking :) ... in Lucene, every indexed field has a DB like "index" on it
that makes traversing the values in a range.  Trust me: I have
applications that do a *lot* of "range queries" in Solr (which FYI: Solr
cleverly deals with using RangeFilter's) and the performance is fine --
especially if you use a lot of ranges frequently (ie: if you are commonly
doing bounding boxes arround the coordinates of major cities)



-Hoss


Mime
View raw message