From my perspective, this is an irrelevant question. The real question
is "is Lucene indexing fast enough for my application?". Which nobody can answer for you, you have to experiment.
If you're building an index that's only updated every 6 months, Lucene is certainly "fast enough". If you're recreating the index every 6 seconds, it's a different question. So, I recommend that you create a test application that does nothing except read your source, do whatever parsing you need to do and does NOT index it at all. Record the time it takes. Then try the same thing WITH indexing and record the difference. Then, to get a sense of the dimension of the problem, try substituting inserting into the RDBMS instead of the Lucene index. Once you have numbers, you can make better decisions And people can give you better advice, especially if you include more detail of your design. Best Erick On 6/15/07, Chew Yee Chuang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, I'm a new user to Lucene, and heard that it is a powerful tool for full text search and I'm planning to use it in my project for data storage purpose. Before the implementation, I could like to know whether there is performance issue on Lucene indexing process. I have no doubt on the retrieving and searching feature in Lucene but the indexing process. I have tested my current system to insert 1000 records in RDBMS storage it took about 1 seconds. Thus, if I change my solution to Lucene, can Lucene indexing process perform faster than RDBMS ? I have go through some of the article talking about the "MergeFactor" and "MaxMergeDocs" parameter for fine tune the indexing process, but no comparison between Lucene indexing process and RDBMS insertion. Thus, hope someone who have experience in Lucene can provide this information or some article that discuss between Lucene and RDBMS. I really appreciate any help in this. Thanks No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.16/849 - Release Date: 6/14/2007 12:44 PM
