Hi Zoran: One of the biggest issues with Lucene DB integration is the network traffic consumed as consequence of indexing or updating operation, apart from transactionalbilty which can be relaxed in some application. During our Oracle Open World presentation we present some of these issues comparing performance during indexing time (integrated solution versus middle tier solution), network traffic, executions plans and others. Obviously its based on Oracle databases but the concepts are similar for any other solutions. You can download the complete presentation from: http://www28.cplan.com/cbo_export/208/PS_S298820_298820_208-1_v1.pdf http://www28.cplan.com/cbo_export/208/PS_S298820_298820_208-1_v2.pdf To download presentations, please enter the following when prompted. Note the Username and Password are case sensitive. Username: cboracle Password: oraclec6 Or you can see on-line only the Oracle Lucene integration details using Google docs at: http://docs.google.com/Presentation?id=ddgw7sjp_156gf9hczxv Best regards, Marcelo.
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 4:43 AM, agatone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > I asked this question already on "lucene-general" list but also got advised > to ask here too. > > I'm working on a project that has big database in the background (some > tables have about 1500000 rows). We decided to use Lucene for "faster" > search. Our search works similar as all searches: you write search string, > get list of hits with detail link. But there is dilemma if we should store > more data into index than it's needed. > > One side of developing team insists that we should use lucene index as > somekind of storage for data so when you get hit, you go onto details and > then again use lucene to find document that matches the selected ID and take > the data from Lucene index. So in the end you end with copying complete > database tables into the lucene index. > > Other side insists on storing to index only data that is displayed directly > to the user when showing the search results list and needed for search > criteria. When you go onto details, you have the matching ID so you can > pickup that row from database by that ID rather than search it inside Lucene > index. > > Can someone please describe drawbacks and advantages of both approaches. > Actually can someone write down what's the actual profit, where and when of > the Lucene itself in real production env. > > IT would be great if there is anyone who could write his experience with > indexing and searching large amount of data. > > > Thank you > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Lucene-vs.-Database-tp19755932p19755932.html > Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Marcelo F. Ochoa http://marceloochoa.blogspot.com/ http://marcelo.ochoa.googlepages.com/home ______________ Want to integrate Lucene and Oracle? http://marceloochoa.blogspot.com/2007/09/running-lucene-inside-your-oracle-jvm.html Is Oracle 11g REST ready? http://marceloochoa.blogspot.com/2008/02/is-oracle-11g-rest-ready.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
