on Mon Dec 03 2012, Timo Sirainen <tss-AT-iki.fi> wrote: > On 4.12.2012, at 4.50, Dave Abrahams wrote: > >> >> Considering two crashing bugs, which have got no response >> (https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3587525&group_id=80013&atid=558446 >> and >> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3592291&group_id=80013&atid=558446) >> and the lack of activity in its Git repository, I am inclined to think >> that CLucene's current release series (e.g. 2.3.3.4) should be >> considered unsuitable for serious use (including with Dovecot). > > I haven't heard of any big problems in a couple of large > installations. Maybe the problems exist only in OSX and not in > Linux?..
I'd be shocked if these issues were OS specific, but anything's possible. Also, if you look at their tracker there's no shortage of worrisome problems. >> I'm going to try CLucene 0.9.21, which they claim has been "proven to >> be stable over time" (see http://clucene.sourceforge.net), and see >> how it works out. > > Probably not that easy to port the current fts-lucene to use it.. At > least I think you need to remove the filtering features. Nope, doesn't compile out-of-the-box. I'm back to the latest. >> I wonder if there's a future envisioned for FTS with Dovecot that's >> suitable for small installations (i.e. doesn't require a Solr server) >> and has a good chance of correctness and stability? > > You could try porting it into luceneplusplus. I've thought about it a > few times but haven't had time to > try. https://github.com/luceneplusplus Huh. Nice; uses Boost, and the code doesn't look nearly as awful as that other library. I can't find an API reference, but I guess I could start from the assumption that everything has the same name in both projects. I might try if I get a few minutes, thanks. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing Software Development Training http://www.boostpro.com Clang/LLVM/EDG Compilers C++ Boost
