hi there,
to the lucene topic: now we are using the lucene sail, but we were forced
to hack it to be able to put it above the bigowlim .. it is not
implemented too well, it has problems with handling the transactions
dealing with the big amounts of data (when building the imports, it holds
everything in the memory, so it, logically, has to go down on the heap
space) .. we also found serious problems in handling the index for
multi-value properties, context data, but also in the implementation of
query evaluation .. so, if we wanted to avoid of building our own external
full-text index, integration of lucene sail required many hacks and
workarounds directly in the lucene sail code ..
and this are, in our oppinion, the most important issues, which should be
taken into account .. for sure, with performance optimizations :)
by the way, don't you plan to use the new release of lucene 3.0.0, which
has the really many usefull optimizations?
cheers,
Peter K.
> Hi Peter,
>
> Both issues are currently in progress. Lucene integration is currently
> only
> experimental and is not really flexible or stable to use in production (it
> is
> not even documented). Our goal is to provide enough flexibility so that
> e.g.
> custom analyzers and result rankings are easily pluggable by the engine
> user.
>
> It will be of great value to us if you could summarize the full-text
> search
> flexibility you will need.
>
> The "when" question is a lot harder to answer. I can't give you any
> concrete
> due dates currently, but this is something on the table now and we should
> be
> able to deliver results within the next couple of months. I hope I'm not
> too
> wrong about that... :)
>
>
> Cheers and have a happy new year!
> Ivan
>
>
> On Friday 18 December 2009 13:01:51 Ing. Peter Kostelník PhD. wrote:
>> hi there,
>>
>> we're planning to use the BigOWLIM as the production backend, so I've
>> got
>> just the few questions regarding the further BigOWLIM developement ..
>>
>> 1. I've noticed, that in 3.2.6 snapshot, there is the direct dependency
>> to
>> Lucene 2.9 core .. so, I assume, you're planning to integrate the lucene
>> as the fulltext index/search engine .. pls, would there be the support
>> for
>> configuring the lucene? I mean the essential issues, such as adding
>> custom
>> analysers/tokenizers, fuzzy search support, custom query parsers, etc. ?
>> .. when do you plan to integrate the lucene?
>>
>> 2. is there some possibility to force BigOWLIM to perform logging in
>> some
>> reasonable way? .. now everything is flushed into (I guess)
>> System.out/err
>> .. and, well, this is not so suitable for production backend ..
>>
>> thanks in advance,
>> best wishes and merry christmas,
>> Peter K.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWLIM-discussion mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
>
_______________________________________________
OWLIM-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
