Wagner, Thanks so much for your suggestions! I think your explanation is great.
Best, LB On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Wagner Ignacio Pinto Junior<[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Li, > Wayne, > > I think the decision about to use or not to use an RDBMS should be based on > features you need. > > Wayne is right to warn you that Lucene is not meant to replace RDBMS, but if > you do not need RDBMS features I think it is ok to only use Lucene to store > data. (Someone correct me if I'm mistaken) :) > > I do use Lucene and SQL Server, and both have their own role, Lucene for > full text search and SQL Server for relational data, and I keep both in sync > dealing with CRUD. > > If you go for Lucene alone, be careful with updates to your data, because > you will need to copy all fields manually, something you would not need to > worry with a RDBMS update. > > Regards, > Wagner Junior > > > Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:27:07 +0800 >> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET without DB >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> >> Dear Wayne, >> >> I might not clarify what I am doing. >> >> I didn't establish a traditional Web site. What I am doing is a >> searching engine with some new techniques. I need to crawl pages from >> some Web sites and manage them on my site. I think when users search >> the pages, Lucene can support for sure. However, when I manage the >> crawled links locally myself, a database, such as MySQL, must be good >> enough. This is my initial design. >> >> But if so, my site must have two modules to manage data. One is Lucene >> and the other is MySQL. Is it necessary? I even found that MySQL had a >> bug, such as "Invalid attempt to access a field before calling >> Read()". So if Lucene can do both the above work, I might not use >> MySQL any more. How do you think about that? >> >> Thanks so much! >> LB >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Wayne >> Douglas<[email protected]> wrote: >> > Li, U can store HTML on disk and lucene can index that. But to think that a >> > db makes a website cumbersome, for all but the most basic sites, unless >> > you're doing some radical thinking, you're digging yourself into a hole. >> > >> > Do you have some more detail about the site you're trying to build and the >> > implementation you're thinking about using? >> > >> > ----------------------------- >> > e-wayne <at> isit.gd >> > t-07525 424 882 >> > >> > On 11 Aug 2009, at 06:03 AM, Li Bing <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Thanks so much for your responses! >> >> >> >> Originally my system use MySQL to save some non-full-text searching >> >> data and use Lucene to manage my crawled Web pages. However, I think >> >> MySQL makes my system cumbersome. So I decide to manage all of my data >> >> by Lucene no matter if the data is full-text searching based or not. >> >> >> >> According to your emails, I think the above approach is feasible, >> >> right? Thanks again! >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> LB >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Michael >> >> Barbarelli<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Sorry if my last message was terse , Li. The beauty of Lucene is that >> >>> you can basically index from almost any data source imaginable. You >> >>> will just have to do the work of parsing through that data yourself. >> >>> >> >>> On Monday, August 10, 2009, Li Bing <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi, all, >> >>>> >> >>>> Is it possible to use Lucene.NET only without DB? What about the >> >>>> performance? >> >>>> >> >>>> I appreciate so much for your help! >> >>>> >> >>>> LBLabs >> >>>> >> >>> >> > >
