On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 14:00, Alexander Klimetschek <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 13:09, David Wagener <[email protected]> wrote: >> But when I compare the performance of both solutions, the search module >> based on “Bundle File-System” is faster than running search module on >> “Bundle Database PM”. > > The (lucene) search index implementation is independent from the > persistence manager. Search times should have the same speed if the > content and the queries are the same. > > The only difference could be in the time it takes to index data, as > that depends on the latency of the pm.
and the time to read the items of the result set from the PM. regards marcel >> My Question: What about storing data in oracle? is there a possibility to >> use oracle indexing rather than lucene's? > > Not easily. The search index implementation is made purely for JCR, to > support property and full-text indexing plus all the special features > as described in the spec. And Lucene, especially if the index is kept > locally as now, is faster as an Oracle based index... at least I would > guess so. > > Oracle itself offers a JCR binding (they were part of the standards > committee), but only for their XML db AFAIK and I don't know if they > support the full JCR search features. > > Regards, > Alex > > -- > Alexander Klimetschek > [email protected] >
