I also question whether it could handle extreme volume with such good query
speed.
Has anyone done numbers with 1+ million documents?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Naber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 5:44 PM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Lucene vs. MySQL
limited.
John.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 1:23 AM
Subject: RE: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
I also question whether it could handle extreme volume with such good query
speed.
Has anyone done numbers with 1+ million
performance on the type of search we do.
Anson
-Original Message-
From: Florian Sauvin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:55 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
Someone came into my office
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
trying to Lucene for -- why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
index to do that -- after thinking about it for a few
Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
trying to Lucene for -- why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
index to do that -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
realized I don't have a great answer.
MySQL builds inverted indexes for (in theory) doing the
On Tuesday 20 July 2004 21:29, Tim Brennan wrote:
Does anyone out there have
anything more concrete they can add?
Stemming is still on the MySQL TODO list:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Fulltext_TODO.html
Also, for most people it's easier to extend Lucene than MySQL (as MySQL is
written
On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
trying to Lucene for -- why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
index to do that -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
realized I don't have a great answer.
MySQL
