On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Richard Rodgers <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mark:
>
> A couple of points:
>
> 1. My concerns have nothing to do with solr - I would say exactly the
> same thing if the component in question were an RDF triple-store, a JMS
> provider, etc - or any other powerful and useful piece of infrastructure
> that can help DSpace scale. I think it is worth putting substantial effort
> (and pain) into preserving the 'market advantage' that DSpace now enjoys of
> having both a very low technical barrier to entry, but the ability to 'turn
> the complexity dial' (lucene->solr->multicore->sharded) when needed for
> scale or performance - in just the way XOAI appears to have engineered it.
>
But OAI doesn't use Lucene (DSQuery), just straight DB queries, it is
increased complexity to engineer a way to use the legacy code if XOAI is
feature equivalent.
Likewise, Solr is present and enabled by default now, its now those who
choose to "disable" it that are unconventional.
> 2. Even if solr were as lightweight as a file system, our application
> coverage of it is rather patchy (as you note below). I'm concerned that if
> efforts like your #1 (which I completely endorse *as an option*) were done
> and we remove lucene support, we risk disenfranchising many users. Last
> time I checked, about half of even the 1.8 adopters were using JSPUI (which
> lacks many solr-backed features) - should we cut them loose (i.e. let them
> worry about solrizing their UI themselves), or preserve the legacy lucene
> support?
>
Point taken. Just a quick note, CILEA has worked through the Discovery on
JSPUI functionality and AndreaB was wishing to talk at OR12 about its
contribution. this would be a large step in that direction.
> So by all means, let's continue to demonstrate the benefits of solr and
> expand its use - just without pulling the lucene rug out from under us.
>
So it sounds like, unless we see parity, theres hesitancy about dropping
Lucene support entirely... Ok. However, I'm wondering, if we can get
Discovery for JSPUI into place for 3.0, would the community be comfortable
with enabling it by default, with instructions on how to disable it and
return to "Legacy Search and Browse"? In a similar case, if the legacy OAI
code is left in place, but xoai based on solr is enabled by default, would
that be acceptable?
My intent in pushing this area is that I'd like to see our defaults shift
away from what was legacy and more towards these solutions we want to see
greater adoption of.
Best,
Mark
--
[image: @mire Inc.]
*Mark Diggory *(Schedule a Meeting <https://tungle.me/markdiggory>)
*2888 Loker Avenue East, Suite 305, Carlsbad, CA. 92010*
*Esperantolaan 4, Heverlee 3001, Belgium*
http://www.atmire.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Dspace-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-devel
