Mailing-List: contact user-help@lucenenet.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@lucenenet.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of witchlightning@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.212.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALftz8YxZZPdjMVf2xqF=E-pxG8nFm+Z9L4BzDYc=nrjsMx4AA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAAd_LBJFZ-3Y3f4Sc=AT=KnNiJTG0FG645=Rt4abnYhDpS=K2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHTr4Zvb_Leon1OPJa5NmM4YTOhCWwuKA65q8-rk_WRzhMwf8w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABgT_g+WRWFyjCvJnyW9YpNBCvaPvBe41ZzkVqEiU=_=youH2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<009901d04166$77621290$662637b0$@farpoint.com>
	<CAHTr4ZuG91vo9eZXNwQxLpZX+16UPa0L4G-SbVhQjjkjiJNeBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+y+_f2670vSyTbxDCi_dqJxXK5wLp9i9rRdXa0rJ0tEnPEarg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALftz8ZDgZT=DXD+ib=eRyEry5Ui6yKzn7_Gk9ijG61yEw--sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHTr4Zt249e02PKvLGTk6E8wp0WEvJRO_tZPkWXctEmKu+vSPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALftz8YxZZPdjMVf2xqF=E-pxG8nFm+Z9L4BzDYc=nrjsMx4AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:32:17 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAJsy1g4D+Y+O0z5O0+=A+j=M7zc+RxmhUfSFpzD=_bBH9xEXSg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Lucene.net vs Lucene with IKVM
From: James Lewis <witchlightning@gmail.com>
To: user@lucenenet.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113602ac975fd8050ed94030

--001a113602ac975fd8050ed94030
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sitecore (https://www.sitecore.net/) might help. They sell a .NET CMS that
uses Lucene.

Cheers,
James

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Alberto Le=C3=B3n <leontiscar@gmail.com> wr=
ote:

> Wikipedia in the past used Lucene.Net in Linux + Mono
>
> The Mono team are today in Xamarin.
>
> To talk to them could be a good option .
>
> Should I talk with the Xamarin's co-founder? I frequently speak with him.
>
>
>
> 2015-02-05 18:37 GMT+01:00 Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>:
>
> > Microsoft are actually using Lucene.NET in at least 3 projects, one of
> them
> > contributed 2 people to help us get the tests green.
> >
> > That's all good input, thanks - but we did hijack a different thread :)
> >
> > Anyway, looks like I'll be headed the crowd-funding route, but its goin=
g
> to
> > take a while to figure out. If any big sponsors step up before then -
> > that'll be great.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Alberto Le=C3=B3n <leontiscar@gmail.com=
>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps you should to talk with Sebastien Ros who is hired by Microso=
ft
> > to
> > > do Orchard CMS
> > >
> > > As I remember Orchard CMS uses Lucene .Net
> > >
> > > The current asp.net blogs are running on top of Orchard CMS
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2015-02-05 18:23 GMT+01:00 Bogdan Litescu <
> bogdan.litescu@avatar-soft.ro
> > >:
> > >
> > > > Microsoft has own search engines to sell.
> > > >
> > > > We have a search engine built on top of Lucene for DNN. DNN is most
> > > popular
> > > > open source .NET CMS. It was actually a project started by Microsof=
t
> > and
> > > > donated to the community more than 10 years ago. Same thing,
> Microsoft
> > > > didn't really invest anything in DNN since then. They have Sharepoi=
nt
> > to
> > > > push to their clients.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> itamar@code972.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm already in contact with them. Not as easy as you'd think...
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > > > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Frank Yu <frank.yu@farpoint.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I am sure that Microsoft would like to see Lucene.NET version
> > > running.
> > > > > > Maybe they can sponsor the effort. Just a thought.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Frank Yu
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Elad Margalit [mailto:eladmarg@gmail.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 6:34 AM
> > > > > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> > > > > > Cc: user@lucenenet.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.net vs Lucene with IKVM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Totally Agree with Syn-Hershko,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Currently, I'm using the ikvm ported version, i can tell for
> sure,
> > > > there
> > > > > > is at least 20% penalty in performance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > when you're using the ivkm version, the JIT avoid many
> > optimizations,
> > > > in
> > > > > > the future, we'll be able to do much more optimizations -
> > > async/await,
> > > > > SIMD
> > > > > > instructions when RyuJIT is out in few month, bcl collections,
> > > > stackalloc
> > > > > > for small inline arrays and many other stuff.
> > > > > > we'll also be able to monitor the critical performance paths in
> > tools
> > > > > such
> > > > > > as ants profiler or dotTrace, and make lucene even more faster.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i have no doubt after the porting will be done, it will be abou=
t
> > > 15-20%
> > > > > > faster than the native java version.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > its a main goal for all of us to contribute to this port
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you all guys
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > E
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> > > itamar@code972.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It robs us of many optimization opportunities on the CLR. Jav=
a
> > > Lucene
> > > > > > > compiled using IKVM will not perform as well as a native port=
.
> > > Think
> > > > > > > async/await, BCL data structures, different GC considerations
> > (LOH
> > > > for
> > > > > > > example), etc. There's also the issue of supporting PCL, Mono=
,
> > > Mobile
> > > > > > > and Azure natively. Just to name a few.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've had a chat with the lead developer of IKVM and promised =
to
> > run
> > > > an
> > > > > > > IKVM version head to head with the native port once we are
> done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <
> https://twitter.com/synhershko
> > >
> > > > > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant Lucene.NET committer and PMC
> > > member
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Omri Suissa <
> > > > omri.suissa@diffdoof.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It looks like it takes a lot of time to manually port Lucen=
e
> to
> > > > .net
> > > > > > > (still
> > > > > > > > in version 3), why not using ikvm to port (at least as a ba=
se
> > > line
> > > > > > > > and improve from there)?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What are the disadvantages of ikvm in this case?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Omri
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <http://www.dnnsharp.com/>
> > > > Bogdan Litescu
> > > > www.dnnsharp.com
> > > > www.facebook.com/DnnSharp
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://es.linkedin.com/in/albertoleontiscar/en
> > > https://twitter.com/AlbertCSharpMan
> > > http://stackoverflow.com/users/690958/alberto-leon
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://es.linkedin.com/in/albertoleontiscar/en
> https://twitter.com/AlbertCSharpMan
> http://stackoverflow.com/users/690958/alberto-leon
>

--001a113602ac975fd8050ed94030--