I am using the PHP library for a project and was looking through the code to see what differentiates the Solr HTTP interface query versus the Lucene search (besides the syntax and the interface, etc) as paging is very useful for my code. From the PHP library with lucene I can do a search with lucene, then a reduce job to sort, then another reduce to slice the results. With Solr, we can just do a cURL with the parameters to do the same thing.
I scanned the Erlang code, and in the end, both call stream_search(), but the Lucene query will pass the results back to luke for possibly another MR phase, and the Solr query simply sorts and truncates the list. So: 1. Does anyone have a general idea at what point the Solr query will start to get really slow as far as number of keys in a bucket and other factors? I know this is dependent on many things, just looking for a rough idea of when it's a bad idea to use the Solr interface. 2. Also, I see that Riak will cache the map phase of a map reduce, so will it cache the initial search? Or does it use some other mechanism I'm not seeing to cache search results? 3. Finally, for the Solr query, why not automatically add a sort and/or slice phase if the user passes in sort, start or count parameters in the Solr query? Please correct me if any of the assumptions I made are wrong, as usually when I ask these questions I end up with my foot in my mouth. - Joe Lambert joseph.g.lamb...@gmail.com +86 13656213284
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
