On 25 Feb 2009, at 15:22, Maurício Linhares wrote:
> > Why don't you use a full text search engine that doesn't require a > database -> http://lucene.apache.org/solr/ > > Can't understand why people still try to use Sphinx, when it doesn't > get any near Solr's features and doesn't update the indexes on the > fly. Last time I looked (admittedly a while back) sphinx was noticeably faster at indexing (eg see http://blog.evanweaver.com/articles/2008/03/17/rails-search-benchmarks and http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/files/presentations/EuroOSCON2006-High-Performance-FullText-Search.pdf ). As far as the original question goes Sphinx doesn't have to be able to talk to your database if you can provide a command line tool that will produce an appropriately formatted xml stream for sphinx. Fred > > > - > Maurício Linhares > http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) | http:// > blog.codevader.com/ (en) > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Carsten Gehling > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Can anyone recommend a search engine for Rails that works with MS SQL >> Server? >> >> I have good experience in using Sphinx and the Rails plugin >> UltraSphinx. >> Unfortunately, it supports only MySQL and PostgreSQL. The newest beta >> version does add support for MSSQLServer, but only if Sphinx is >> installed on a Windows machine - and I have to run it on Debian >> Linux. >> >> So if anyone knows of a similar search engine, that supports the >> above, >> I would be very grateful. Especially if it already has a plugin for >> Rails. :-) >> >> - Carsten >> -- >> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >> >>> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
