Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-22 Thread Clay Ferguson
Peter, Everybody pretty much ignored the guy who claimed version, locking, etc. can be written in very little time from scratch. Rarely do you see such tomfoolery on this mailing list. In fact that was the only time. Most of us ignored him. Best regards, Clay Ferguson wcl...@gmail.com On Tue, Se

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-22 Thread Peter Harrison
There are a few core features for me. The hierarchy storage is more than fluff; you can do similar things in SQL, but looking at your storage in a hierarchy with no enforced schema provides a level of flexibility which has made some very cool applications possible. Also the notifications system m

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-10 Thread Ian Boston
On 10 September 2015 at 09:26, Thomas Mueller wrote: > Hi, > > >2. You really really want a folder hierarchy. > >(I say #2 as .5 because I believe tagging fills this need, so who cares > >about folders?) > > There are some additional reasons to use folders (web URLs are > hierarchical, file syste

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-10 Thread Thomas Mueller
Hi, >2. You really really want a folder hierarchy. >(I say #2 as .5 because I believe tagging fills this need, so who cares >about folders?) There are some additional reasons to use folders (web URLs are hierarchical, file system are). >The other things Jackrabbit brings to the table like versio

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-09 Thread Alexander Klimetschek
On 09.09.2015, at 09:19, Flavel Heyman wrote: > 2. You really really want a folder hierarchy. > (I say #2 as .5 because I believe tagging fills this need, so who cares > about folders?) That is what a content repository is all about, compared to an RDBMS. This paper might give some more insights

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-09 Thread mike osterhout
Ouch. On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Flavel Heyman wrote: > After spending a decent chunk of time in Jackrabbit, there is about no gap > that Jackrabbit fills. > > There are about 1.5 reasons I can think of using Jackrabbit. > 1. You use a system that is pre-built already using Jackrabbit (CQ5

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-09 Thread Flavel Heyman
After spending a decent chunk of time in Jackrabbit, there is about no gap that Jackrabbit fills. There are about 1.5 reasons I can think of using Jackrabbit. 1. You use a system that is pre-built already using Jackrabbit (CQ5/AEM, Liferay, Š) 2. You really really want a folder hierarchy. (I say #

Re: How does Jackrabbit compares to Elasticsearch

2015-09-09 Thread Ian Boston
Hi, ElasticSearch (ES) and Jackrabbit (JR) cover different use cases, so can't really be compared with one another although there is some overlap. ES provides search into documents, where the documents are bundles of properties represented by a json map. ES supports some complex query patterns tha