It’s worth noting that secondary indexes (2i) has some other advantages over 
solr search. If you _can_ model your queries in 2i then I'd recommend it.

Secondary indexes  have a richer API than is currently documented, if you look 
at https://docs.basho.com/riak/1.4.7/dev/using/2i/ you’ll see that documents a 
feature that allows the index terms to be filtered via reg ex. There is also 
the feature that can return the actual riak objects for a $keys index search,
You can pack the index terms with data and return the terms in a query so that 
you don’t need a further object fetch (see return_terms in docs.)
Secondary indexes are written atomically with the object they index.
Operationally they don’t require you run a JVM and Solr alongside your riak 
nodes.

You have the tools with basho_bench to answer the question about performance 
and overhead for your workload. I suspect for “overhead” 2i wins, as there is 
no JVM-per-node.

Modelling for 2i is perhaps harder, in the classical nosql way, you have to do 
more work upfront when designing your querying.

I hope that helps a little. I worked quite a lot on 2i and never really 
understood why riak-search was seen as a replacment, imo they’re complementary, 
and you pick the one that best fits.

Cheers

Russell

On 2 Feb 2017, at 09:43, Alex Feng <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Riak-users,
> 
> I am currently using Riak search to do some queries, since my queries are 
> very simple, it should be fulfilled by secondary indexes as well. 
> So, my question is which one has better performance and less overhead, let's 
> say both can fulfill the query requirement.
> 
> Many thanks in advance.
> 
> Br,
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> riak-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com


_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com

Reply via email to