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 #2 as .5 because I believe tagging fills this need, so who cares about folders?) The other things Jackrabbit brings to the table like versioning, locking, restrictions can be implemented in very little time from scratch. In fact if you are implementing all 3 it takes less time to do it from scratch than it would to do it in Jackrabbit because the order in which you do the above things together matters. Obviously you have to use Jackrabbit Oak to get ³real" performance, going with plain Jackrabbit will leave out a lot of the the indexing performance enhancements. On 9/9/15, 10:07 AM, "Adrian Luna" <adrian.luna.co...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, > >I am new to Jackrabbit but have some experience with Search Engines and >lately with Elasticsearch. I can see the advantages of Elasticsearch over >Jackrabbit because of its distributed style. However, I think I don't >completely understand the picture and the space that Jackrabbit fills in >the world of technical solutions, because I can't figure out in which >situation could Jackrabbit be used instead of Elasticsearch. >Maybe because of my knowledge of Elasticsearch I tend to use it even >forcing it for systems where it's not designed for, so I would like to >understand the whole picture and maybe work with Jackrabbit to include it >into my skillset. > >I can imagine some of the issues could be support of a lot of document >types or observation, but still those are things that are implementable >using Elasticsearch maybe together with Apache Tika or simlar libraries. > >As I said, I just came up to Jackrabbit today, so my knowledge is very >limited, so don't be too harsh on me if the question is as simple as it >seems to be.
