On Aug 16, 2010, at 6:37 AM, Tibor Simko wrote: > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Roman Chyla wrote: >> because index is created by a writer which has instant access to the >> invenio, and because values are only indexed (not stored - it is the >> invenio, that takes care of that from database), those issues are >> eliminated. The lucene is there as a search provider, returning docids >> only > > For the benefit of everyone not present today, we also discussed that > Solr might not need data objects stored for its faceting either, which > gives us this nice possibility of (1) Invenio storing data objects and > (2) Invenio/Lucene/Solr storing indexes. This would make the potential > co-existence between the tools much easier. (And Invenio modules that > may have to rely on instantaneous there/not-there response, such as > parts of WebSubmit, could still use MySQL tables.)
This is very encouraging! Thanks Roman for demonstrating the proof-of-concept. This separation makes some bit of sense to me, and after all doesn't sound so very different than running a bibindex daemon, no? > >> it was agreed we will do some tests when we find the box with data >> (all inspire records), some time this week > > The freeest one so far seems to be INSPIRETEST, so maybe we shall borrow > its cycles for a throw-away testing of Lucene re-indexing the whole > INSPIRE later this week. Yes, INSPIRE-Test seems perfect for this, note: 1) Tibor saved aside the work that was done there in some long ago test. 2) The current data there is not the correct MARC etc. It should be updated from dev or prod... 3)...but this is still subject to the max_allowed_packet issue which I am still trying to get around, to get a clean dump. I may have one from dev or prod soon, in which case I will roll it out on test db unless I hear otherwise from Roman. Travis > > Best regards > -- > Tibor Simko Travis C. Brooks Manager of Information Systems & SPIRES/INSPIRE SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Library http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/
