ss
>>> to the index of other clients.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com]
>>> Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28
>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject:
m: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com]
> > Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28
> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
> >
> > What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for
> > each client?
>
> From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com]
> Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
>
> What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for
> each client?
> If there's no data sharing
access to the index
of other clients.
Greg
-Original Message-
From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com]
Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for
each
What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for
each client?
If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr
server/index doesn't seem necessary.
Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is.
On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Geo
