have to make them
yourself. from 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
EARTH has a Right To Life,
otherwise we all die.
--- On Wed, 10/13/10, Jan Høydahl / Cominvent wrote:
> From: Jan Høydahl / Cominvent
> Subject: Re: LuceneRevolution - NoSQL
urself. from
> 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
>
> EARTH has a Right To Life,
> otherwise we all die.
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/13/10, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
>> From: Yonik Seeley
>> Subject: Re: LuceneRevolution
/10, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> From: Yonik Seeley
> Subject: Re: LuceneRevolution - NoSQL: A comparison
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Wednesday, October 13, 2010, 5:46 AM
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Jan
> Høydahl / Cominvent
>
> wrote:
> > I
On 10/13/2010 6:46 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
A related point - the load balancing implementation that's part of
SolrCloud (and looks like it will be committed to trunk soon), does
keep track of what server it used for the first phase and uses that
for subsequent phases.
Are the cloud bits likel
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Jan Høydahl / Cominvent
wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the 2nd phase to fetch doc-summaries goes directly to same
> server as first phase. But what if you stick a LB in between?
A related point - the load balancing implementation that's part of
SolrCloud (and looks li
2010/10/12 Peter Keegan :
> I listened with great interest to Grant's presentation of the NoSQL
> comparisons/alternatives to Solr/Lucene.
My question: will this presentation be available somewhere? I do not
find any presentation material nn the conference web site.
Király Péter
http://eXtensible
Subject: Re: LuceneRevolution - NoSQL: A comparison
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, October 12, 2010, 9:11 AM
> This is a different issue. You are
> seeing the latency between master index update and
> replication to slave(s).
> Solve this by pointing your monitor
This is a different issue. You are seeing the latency between master index
update and replication to slave(s).
Solve this by pointing your monitoring script directly to slave instead of
master.
What this thread is about is a potential difference in state during the
execution of a single sharded
On 10/11/2010 6:32 PM, Peter Keegan wrote:
When Solr does a distributed search across shards, it does this in 2 phases
(correct me if I'm wrong):
1. 1st query to get the docIds and facet counts
2. 2nd query to retrieve the stored fields of the top hits
The problem here is that the index could
This is what FAST does in ESP. When a new version of a partition is built, it
is staged in its own process and co-exists alongside the old one. The
query-dispatcher sees both and routes traffic based on requested "generation
id".
Should probably not invest in such a feature until there's a clea
,
otherwise we all die.
--- On Mon, 10/11/10, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> From: Yonik Seeley
> Subject: Re: LuceneRevolution - NoSQL: A comparison
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Monday, October 11, 2010, 7:20 PM
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 8:32 PM,
> Peter Keegan
&g
Well,
I think that if some is searching the 'whole of the dataset' to find the
'individual data' then an SQL database outside of Solr makes as much sense.
There's plenty of data in the world or most applications that needs to stay
normalized or at least has benefits to being that way.
Denni
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Peter Keegan wrote:
> I listened with great interest to Grant's presentation of the NoSQL
> comparisons/alternatives to Solr/Lucene. It sounds like the jury is still
> out on much of this. Here's a use case that might favor using a NoSQL
> alternative for storing '
13 matches
Mail list logo
