Thanks for the pointer. If I understand correctly, the index partitioning strategy would simply mirror the region-server partitioning strategy. That is to say, each region would have a lucene index stored in HDFS to provide secondary indexing. When a user searches for "Fat Cat", then every region would receive the query, and execute the search and the results of this "query fanout" would then be merged together. Is that roughly the idea? Individual lucene indexes would remain reasonably sized because each index indexes only the data of a single region. Correct?
This is really interesting stuff. Thanks for your help in understanding it. -geoff -----Original Message----- From: Gary Helmling [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 11:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: hbase + lucene? I wasn't at the day-after presentation, but I believe these are the slides? https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B2c-F WyLSJBCN2E5MTdmOGMtY2U5NS00NmEwLWE2NmItZTYxOTI0MTJmMzU5&hl=en_US On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > Here is the issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3529 > > And let me chase Jason to post his slides. > > St.Ack > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Geoff Hendrey <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi - > > > > > > > > At hadoop summit it was mentioned that there was a planning meeting for > > a project regarding hbase and lucene. I believe the meeting was > > scheduled for the day after the summit. I wasn't able to attend, but I > > would like to keep abreast of what's going on in this regard. Anyone > > know anything about this? > > > > > > > > -geoff > > > > >
