Using NHibernate.Search : The MySql database (i'd prefer sql server but that's up to you) stores the data. when you insert, update data - lucene indexes it, stores the index in the traditional format (index files on disk). The index holds a reference to the location of the actual data in the db - so retrieving data is no faster or slower than using file based storage and retrieving is no faster or slower than standard db reading.
w:// On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Li Bing<[email protected]> wrote: > I think the performance of MySQL is not as high as Lucene when > searching by any possible keywords. And, MySQL or relational databases > look cumbersome. > > How do you think about that? > > Thanks, > LBLabs > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Wayne Douglas<[email protected]> > wrote: >> Not sure about the other questions but why not use nhibernate.search and >> keep ur data in mysql? >> >> ----------------------------- >> e-wayne <at> isit.gd >> t-07525 424 882 >> >> On 8 Aug 2009, at 04:55 AM, Li Bing <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, all, >>> >>> I have three questions about Lucene.NET as follows. >>> >>> 1) I am using Lucene to index my crawled Web data. Originally, MySQL >>> was used. I plan to replace it with Lucene.NET. Anybody has such >>> experiences? I really worry about the performance and the load on the >>> machines. >>> >>> 2) What's the latest version of Lucene.NET? The link, >>> http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/, is the only location to get >>> it? >>> >>> 3) Any successful cases? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> LBLabs >> > -- Cheers, w://
