Hi, On 10 August 2016 at 14:11, Davide Giannella <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 09/08/2016 13:18, Ian Boston wrote: > > Alternatively, move the indexes so that a sync property index update > > doesn't perform a conditional change to the global root document ? ( A > new > > thread would be required to discuss this if worth talking about.) > > I'm stubborn and maybe even slow in learning, but again I ask myself: > why are we storing the indexes in the repository itself? > me also. > > I was not part of the original discussion around this; but frankly I > would have expected to have the indexes stored separately from the > repository. Let's say on the file system. Something like JR2 where it > was even possible to delete a directory and all the indexes were > re-generated from scratch. > > What do we loose if we would be moving the indexes outside of the > repository? Possibly the index having a revision made visible by the root revision, however, I think there is a filter that removes later revisions from a result set in the case of a Lucene index. Whatever provided the index would need to be as fast or faster than Oak to be synchronous. > Which means each AEM node will have its own index(es). > Or better, sharded indexes with local indexes managed independently (each committing to memory not disk with a WAL to deal with failures) so the cost of indexing is parallelised and can scale horizontally... which is one step beyond the Hybrid Index proposal. > > Cheers > Davide > > > Best Regards Ian
