Yes, very significant ones. Also memory usage is vastly improved.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Shuangyang Yang
wrote:
> Erick,
>
> Thank you very much. Is there any performance comparison between these two
> versions? Is there any data on the performance?
>
> Thank you very much
> Best Regar
Erick,
Thank you very much. Is there any performance comparison between these two
versions? Is there any data on the performance?
Thank you very much
Best Regards
---
Shuangyang Yang
linkedin.com/in/everyoung
On 7/17/15, 10:06 AM, "Erick Erickson" wrote:
>Please look at the CHANGES.txt fi
Please look at the CHANGES.txt file for Solr and/or Lucene,
there's a "New Features" section for every release.
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Shuangyang Yang
wrote:
> Erick, Amish,
>
> Thank you very much for your reply. They are really helpful. Can you tell
> me what are the comp
Erick, Amish,
Thank you very much for your reply. They are really helpful. Can you tell
me what are the compelling features from 2.9.1 to 5.X? I¹m sure there are
many.
Thank you very much
Best Regards
---
Shuangyang Yang
linkedin.com/in/everyoung
On 7/16/15, 8:41 PM, "Erick Erickson" wrote
You have two real choices here:
1> reindex your corpus under 5x
2> follow a tortuous upgrade path. Solr/Lucene only promise to
be backwards compatible through one major version. Thus
Lucene 3x can read Lucene 2x. But Lucene 4x cannot read
read Lucene 2x.
So you'd have to go 2x->3x->4x->5x with cha
No, the file format is not compatible. I think it changed in 4.0.
Amish
On 7/16/15, 6:45 PM, "Shuangyang Yang" wrote:
>Hi there,
>
>We are using lucene 2.9.1 in our product and thinking of upgrading to
>5.X. Is it plausible? Is the file format compatible? Is there any guide
>document that can
