Hi, its not really fair to compare NRT of Solr to ElasticSearch. ElasticSearch provides NRT for distributed indices as well... also when doing heavy indexing Solr lacks real NRT.
The only main disadvantages of ElasticSearch are: * only one (main) committer * no autowarming > the ES team in the end has found it good as a storage but difficult to extend for a lucene expert. The nice thing with ES is that you can e.g. create lucene queries with even high complexity as ES supports lucene-like query nesting via JSON. Also when implementing server side stuff you can take advantage of full lucene power. Ah, before I forgot it: it is very important to test the software yourself. Do not trust me or anybody else :), also the software should fit to your environment, requirements + team! Regards, Peter. PS: here is my different comparison: http://karussell.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/elasticsearch-vs-solr-lucene/ > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Shashi Kant <sk...@sloan.mit.edu> wrote: >> I had posted this earlier on this list, hope this provides some answers >> >> http://engineering.socialcast.com/2011/05/realtime-search-solr-vs-elasticsearch/ > Except it's an out of date comparison. > We have NRT (near real time search) in Solr now. > > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/NearRealtimeSearch > > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com -- http://jetsli.de news reader for geeks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
