On 01/08/2014 06:43, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote:
Maybe Charlie Hull can answer that:
https://twitter.com/FlaxSearch/status/494859596117602304 . He seems to
think that - at least in some cases - Solr is faster.
I'll try to expand on the tweet.
Firstly, this is a totally unscientific comparison - we'd like to have
time to develop a proper public demonstration of some of the performance
differences we've found, which hopefully we will soon...so this is far
more anecdotal than statistical! Our eventual intention is to publicise
any differences so the wider community can tell us if we've done
something wrong, or maybe improve one or both engines. Don't get me
wrong, we *like* the fact there are two cool search server projects
built on Lucene!
I can think of three recent projects where we've compared the two - we
wanted to be sure we were using the best fit for our clients:
1. a search over 40-50 million news stories with relatively complex
filtering requirements - Although ES promised more granular filtering it
was a lot slower to do it. We chose Solr.
2. a pretty standard intranet search over a few million items that might
require some clever visualisation in a future phase. No real difference
in speed, we chose ES.
3. a search over 700k items in the recruitment space with some
geolocation filtering - ES seemed to be faster at indexing, but Solr was
a lot faster for searching, and probably will be equivalent at indexing
once we do some tuning. We chose Solr.
Others have told me that if your documents are rich, choose Solr: if
however you have a large number of more simple documents, choose ES as
the scaling is less painful. If you like old-school XML config, choose
Solr: if you're a bearded hipster running a startup in Shoreditch choose
ES. The aggregations in ES are *way* cool.
YMMV, of course. The *only* sensible way to choose is to try both with
your data and requirements. Benchmarks are all very well, but they don't
necessarily apply to your situation.
Cheers
Charlie
I am also doing a talk and a book on Solr vs. ElasticSearch, but I am
not really planning to address those issues either, only the feature
comparisons.
Regards,
Alex.
Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart
Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Salman Akram
<salman.ak...@northbaysolutions.net> wrote:
I did see that earlier. My main concern is search
performance/scalability/throughput which unfortunately that article didn't
address. Any benchmarks or comments about that?
We are already using SOLR but there has been a push to check elasticsearch.
All the benchmarks I have seen are at least few years old.
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Otis Gospodnetic <otis.gospodne...@gmail.com
wrote:
Not super fresh, but more recent than the 2 links you sent:
http://blog.sematext.com/2012/08/23/solr-vs-elasticsearch-part-1-overview/
Otis
--
Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics
Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Salman Akram <
salman.ak...@northbaysolutions.net> wrote:
This is quite an old discussion. Wanted to check any new comparisons
after
SOLR 4 especially with regards to performance/scalability/throughput?
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Peter <peat...@yahoo.de> wrote:
Have a look:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2271600/elasticsearch-sphinx-lucene-solr-xapian-which-fits-for-which-usage
http://karussell.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/elasticsearch-vs-solr-lucene/
Regards,
Peter.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-vs-ElasticSearch-tp3009181p3200492.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Regards,
Salman Akram
--
Regards,
Salman Akram
--
Charlie Hull
Flax - Open Source Enterprise Search
tel/fax: +44 (0)8700 118334
mobile: +44 (0)7767 825828
web: www.flax.co.uk
