Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucene-net-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 45352 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2011 20:49:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Jan 2011 20:49:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 92668 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jan 2011 20:49:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucene-net-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 92579 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jan 2011 20:49:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-net-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 92571 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jan 2011 20:49:54 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:49:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of digydigy@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.48] (HELO mail-fx0-f48.google.com) (209.85.161.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:49:49 +0000 Received: by fxm2 with SMTP id 2so5481236fxm.35 for ; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 12:49:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=PC55CnE0AR3bOWvYwRsIN6UFq67UE0edLGn8y+xHKLU=; b=yCxsLkmG8OuAX9Uyh4uX+12OYxMs4hpYdfxfHdo9kjQobSnRGozcIm7SauGu0+bkMb Mymu8aOo8G7PzNKqsn/V8bASDirtdE2Un8r7JtuCS797rjTaAop3aCJLDAxG7lZh4Wxu HPSfrcyyQib35fKuecey9+ToZjY9hlrS9is3c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; b=szey0qUFLtaHKU1Q7bTp5tBjZpz+CGBcoAeeLbn/GgM2+pG/1Ab8egkdzKsbfQu6xx qs7lpmiJMjYSf9FX4YBAX7eB4ZB+dLaycrUIn7CHQ542nydxEy/VnO1rmjmanDyBI7My F3+5w/+Vk3Z2Rt+g1aTtJ6bFAUVcD1ek12e78= Received: by 10.223.74.200 with SMTP id v8mr3857958faj.144.1295210968183; Sun, 16 Jan 2011 12:49:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from NEWPC ([81.213.206.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b7sm1341584faa.42.2011.01.16.12.49.26 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 16 Jan 2011 12:49:27 -0800 (PST) From: "Digy" To: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: Using Lucene.Net with Windows Azure Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:48:39 +0200 Message-ID: <004601cbb5be$c1da8b50$458fa1f0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acu1tfXvdxFJT6QoSeeSbg6jGOnbWAACFjMg Content-Language: tr Most probably, I don't understand the problem. Lucene is intented to be a *fast* search engine on *huge* data and people are trying to increase the performance using every tricks that exist. If I don't have enough NW bandwidht comparable to local disk access why should I use AzureDirectory (or any Webdav-server or iSCSI). This structure also includes sharing (possible)sensitive data with MS. Just to avoid backups? PS: I would surely give it a try if I could set up a "Azure Blob Storage - server" on my fast local network. DIGY -----Original Message----- From: Anders Lybecker [mailto:anders@lybecker.com] Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 9:45 PM To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Using Lucene.Net with Windows Azure Hi Corey, I forgot the link - classic LOL Here: http://www.lybecker.com/blog/2011/01/16/using-lucene-net-with-microsoft-azur e/ :-) Anders On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Corey Brand wrote: > > Can you provide a link? > - Corey > > > > > Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:30:31 +0100 > > Subject: Using Lucene.Net with Windows Azure > > From: anders@lybecker.com > > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org > > > > Hi, > > > > I have just written an article about using Lucene.Net with Microsoft > Azure > > on my blog. > > > > I have analyzed the different options, focusing on storage, as it major > > paradigm shift. > > > > Let me know what you think? > > > > :-) > > Anders Lybecker > >