Quantify slower, does it matter? At issue is that usually
Solr spends far more time doing the search than
transmitting the query and response over HTTP. Http
is not really slow *as a protocol* in the first place.
The usual place people have problems here is when
there are a bunch of requests made
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> I don't see why not. I'm assuming a *nix system here so when Solr
> updated an index, any deleted files would hang around.
>
> But I have to ask why bother with the Embedded server in the
> first place? You already have a Solr instance up an
I don't see why not. I'm assuming a *nix system here so when Solr
updated an index, any deleted files would hang around.
But I have to ask why bother with the Embedded server in the
first place? You already have a Solr instance up and running,
why not just query that instead, perhaps using SolrJ?
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 18:35, Ryan McKinley wrote:
> you send a bunch of requests with add( doc/collection ) and they are not
> visible until you send commit()
That's what I meant thanks.
--
Gérard Dupont
Information Processing Control and Cognition (IPCC) - EADS DS
http://weblab-project.org
not sure what you mean... yes, i guess...
you send a bunch of requests with add( doc/collection ) and they are
not visible until you send commit()
On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:07 AM, Gérard Dupont wrote:
my mistake, pb with the buffer I added. But it raises a question :
does solr
(using embedde
my mistake, pb with the buffer I added. But it raises a question : does solr
(using embedded server) has its own buffer mechanism in indexing or not ? I
guess not but I might be wrong.
2009/7/20 Gérard Dupont
> Hi SolR guys,
>
> I'm starting to play with SolR after few years with classic Lucene.
