Hi, We're (Overture/Goto) evaluating Lucene ... email me specific questions.
In general I would say Lucene is very efficient. It is only about 30% slower than Thunderstone Texis (which is a native C code base). Main difference is that Lucene doesn't handle Caching as well as Texis does. Basically the Index is on Disk or in RAM (ie can take up 400-500 MB in our application). Texis for example is able to buffer what it can of the Index in memory without explicit setting of memory limits. Out of the box we couldn't use Phrase Matching for very high volume transactions (we're looking at 1000s queries/sec) and had to customize it to your needs, but because its Open Source, guess what, you can write any kind of optimizations you want. Actually that isn't fair -- just be careful that you understand the performance parameters involved in text retrieval and the various types of querys that are possible. Do you need Text Retrieval or Are you doing an unranked "Text Search" ? Oh, and its free :) Reliable ? Well I've never had a problem someone couldnt answer, and it never crashes (ie its pretty bug-free as far as I can tell). Cheers, Winton Winton Davies Lead Engineer, Overture (NSDQ: OVER) 1820 Gateway Drive, Suite 360 San Mateo, CA 94404 work: (650) 403-2259 cell: (650) 867-1598 http://www.overture.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
