On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Steven Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The performance of DIH is likely to be faster than SolrJ. >> Because , it does not have the overhead of an http request. > > Understood. However, we may not have the option of co-locating the data > to be injested with the Solr server. In that case you may put the file in a mounted NFS directory or you can serve it out with an apache server. > >> What is your data source? I am assuming it is xml. > > Yes. Incoming stream of xml documents to a directory. > >> SolrJ cannot directly index xml . You may need to read docs from xml > before solrj can index it. > > Understood. We'd like to compare the performance difference of DIH vs. > custom xml parsing + SolrJ. good. share your observations > > A. Steven Anderson > 410-418-9908 VSTI > 443-790-4269 cell > > >
-- --Noble Paul
