Hi Thomas, On Apr 18, 2012, at 6:31, "Thomas Koch" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > sounds like an interesting project – may I ask what you actually implemented > and what’s the motivation (e.g. performance?)? > > I’ve started to experiment with the Facet support in Lucene (actually in > PyLucene – ported an example to Python) and found that facetted search > support in Lucene looks powerful (though API is still said to be > ‘experimental’ and I can’t say anything about performance yet). I’m talking > about the org.apache.lucene.facet.* packages – part of the contrib part of > Lucene and available as JARs that’s accessible in PyLucene as well. I’m not > that familiar with Solr but AFAIK it’s based on Lucene (Java) and should > (hopefully) use the same Java code for its facet search support. Of course > Solr adds some nice configuration support and web GUI to Lucene, but the > ‘core’ search is built on Lucene (to my knowledge). So did you re-implement > the Lucene facet search/index code (like TaxonomyReader/Writer, FacetRequest > stuff etc.) in C++ or what part of Solr?? > > Regarding Facet support in PyLucene I can share the samples I’ve ‘ported’ to > Python so far. There’s still a patch pending for JavaList (required by facet > features) which I come back to later on this list (still some open issues). > Hopefully this can be included in the PyLucene 3.6 version … Lucene 3.6 just got released a few days ago. Apart from your patch, the PyLucene 3.6 release is ready. I'm about to go offline (email only) for a week. Let's revisit this patch then (first week of May). It's not blocking the release right now as, even if I sent out a release candidate for a vote, the three business days required for this would take this into the time I'm away. Out of curiosity, why is this patch tied to the facetting module ? Can't you use the regular Java List implementations with it instead of a wrapped Python list ? If there are no wrappers for the classes you want, it's certainly easier to add them and they would provide a more efficient operation as Java code (the facet module) working with them wouldn't have to cross the VM barriers for each and every access into these lists. Andi.. > > Regards > Thomas > -- > OrbiTeam Software GmbH & Co. KG > Germany http://www.orbiteam.de > > > Von: Caleb Burns [mailto:[email protected]] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. April 2012 21:16 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: PyLucene use JCC shared object by default > > Hi, > > I've finished the process at my organization of re-implementing SOLR's > faceting algorithm (in C++). > > We would like the public at large to have access to the work we've done and > plan to do. In order for this to be a real possibility the code needs to be > built against and use the same JVM as the PyLucene installation does. The > most logical way we feel to have this accomplished is by having PyLucenes' > default installation use JCC as a Shared Object. > > We have yet more plans to extend and provide utilities that work with > PyLucene, but this all hinges on having the shared object. The only > alternative methodology would require the bundling of our source with the > PyLucene project itself as a fork. > > We are eager to start open sourcing our work, so please let us know what > would be the best way to integrate our work. > > -- > Caleb Burns > Developer | Riders Discount > 866.931.6644 x851 | www.RidersDiscount.com > > Deal of the Day > > >
