On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Ryan Zezeski <rzeze...@basho.com> wrote:
> > For Solr this would be a delete-by-query which isn't nearly as expensive. > How so? My understanding is that Lucene's index looks pretty much like a LSM-tree, and that any delete (instead of an index drop), will result in the writing a of a tombstone into a new segment, which eventually will have to merged. So a delete is as costly as a write plus the attendant costs of merging. Even if that is solved, Riak Search will have other tradeoffs such > as substantially reduced feature support compared to Yokozuna as well as > reduced performance for many types of queries. But I do agree many indexes > (thus cores) could pose a problem for Yokozuna. > Agreed. I think Yokozuna is a great step forward and I am looking forward to it. I just wanted to point out this scaling limitation that results from the every index on every node architecture. Elias Levy
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
