Hey Ryan, why do you say a Lucene/Solr index served via Terracotta would be substantially slower? I often wanted to try Terracotta + Lucene, but... time.
Thanks, Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch ----- Original Message ---- From: Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 10:52:45 AM Subject: Re: Update schema.xml without restarting Solr? Jeryl Cook wrote: > Top often requested feature: > 1. Make the option on using the "RAMDirectory" to hook in Terracotta( > billion(s) of items in an index anyone?..it would be possible using > this.) This is noted in: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-465 Out of cueriosity, any sense of performance with a terracotta index? It seems like it would have to be *substantially* slower. Also, if it is a RAM directly, does it persist? If your looking to support billions of docs, perhaps consider: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DistributedSearch ryan
