It is, but without a community of active developers it has become stagnant. For example the Lucene library version it utilizes has become outdated and it would likely be a major undertaking to update the code base to the newest version. The biggest reason for the low activity it that I haven't had time to work on the project due to personnel reasons.
In it's current state is it very stable even at very large index sizes however the upfront development effort to use Blur is very high by comparison to ElasticSearch or Solr. I believe this was the primary reason Blur never really caught on in the community. Aaron On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Mark Kerzner <[email protected]> wrote: > But, > > Isn't Blur a new approach arguably better than SOLR and ElasticSearch for > big sizes? > > Mark > > Mark Kerzner, President, Elephant Scale <http://elephantscale.com/> > Book a call with me here <http://www.meetme.so/markkerzner> > Mobile: 713-724-2534, Skype: mark.kerzner1 > > > On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Development has slowed to just the occasional bug fix and mail list > > activity. That's about it at this point. > > > > Aaron > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 6:57 AM, Mark Kerzner <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, guys, > > > > > > I teach SOLR, and I mention Blur as an alternative with a very > > interesting > > > and different approach. > > > > > > What bothers me is somewhat low activity on the code. What is the > > > incubating status of Blur? > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > Mark Kerzner, President, Elephant Scale <http://elephantscale.com/> > > > Book a call with me here <http://www.meetme.so/markkerzner> > > > Mobile: 713-724-2534, Skype: mark.kerzner1 > > > > > >
