About the first option, caches are more effective with more traffic,
so ten front end servers using three Solr servers will have better
caching and probably better overall performance than having separate
search on all ten servers. You can even put an HTTP cache in there and
get better caching.
Cached HTTP responses are usually faster than accessing disc locally.
You say you have a "remote web application". How remote? If the
indexes are big, then copying them to a remote location is a lot of
traffic.
wunder
On Aug 6, 2009, at 8:49 PM, Ninad Raut wrote:
Hi Noble,
Can you explain a bit more on how to use Solr "out of the box". I am
looking at ways to design the UI for remote application quickly and
with
less problems.
Also could you elaborate more on what can go wrong with the first
option?
Thanks.
2009/8/6 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ्
<noble.p...@corp.aol.com>
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Ninad Raut<hbase.user.ni...@gmail.com
>
wrote:
Hi,
I have a search engine on Solr. Also I have a remote web application
which
will be using the Solr Indexes for search.
I have three scenarios:
1) Transfer the Indexes to the Remote Application.
- This will reduce load on the actual solr server and make seraches
faster.
- Need to write some code to transfer the index
- Need to double my effort to update,merge,optimize index
2)Use HTTP GET
- Will increase load on the Solr server
- No extra code needed for transfer
This by far is the best solution. ecause you do not have to do any
work at all. It all works out of the box and that is what everyone
uses
3) Embedded Serach
- Use SolrJ for querying
I want to know which is the best approach.
Regards,
Ninad Raut.
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com
