You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@lucene.apache.org by Tim Brennan <ti...@liquidsys.com> on 2004/07/20 21:29:56 UTC
Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
trying to Lucene for -- "why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
index to do that" -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
realized I don't have a great answer.
MySQL builds inverted indexes for (in theory) doing the same type of
lookup that lucene does. You'd maybe have to build some kind of a layer
on the front to mimic Lucene's analyzers, but that wouldn't be too
hard....
My only experience with MySQLfulltext is trivial test apps -- but the
MySQL world does have some significant advantages (its a known quantity
from an operations perspective, etc)..... Does anyone out there have
anything more concrete they can add?
--tim
Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Tuesday 20 July 2004 21:29, Tim Brennan wrote:
> Does anyone out there have
> anything more concrete they can add?
Stemming is still on the MySQL TODO list:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Fulltext_TODO.html
Also, for most people it's easier to extend Lucene than MySQL (as MySQL is
written in C(++?)) and there are more powerful queries in Lucene, e.g.
fuzzy phrase search.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
Interestingly (and ironically) enough, the project I'm currently
working on requires full-text searching of Word and PDF resumes. SQL
Server is already the required database as well, so we are leveraging
the full-text indexing capabilities it has. There is a special trick
to drop a BLOB into a table which also has a file extension and mime
type columns, and have SQL Server index it with its Index Server
capabilities. Lucene was not needed, and we made the pragmatic
(simplest that worked well) choice.
My recommendation would be to implement something rather than debate it
- and if it is good enough, leave it alone, if not then try a different
approach :)
Erik
On Jul 21, 2004, at 7:29 AM, Anson Lau wrote:
> Depending on what MySQL Full-text search support you probably will
> lose some
> of the advance things you get for free from Lucene, such as proximity
> search, wildcard search, search term and search field boosting,
> scoring of
> the documents, etc.
>
> Afterall it depends on what you need to do. In our dev team we are
> actually
> currently having a mini debate over whether to use lucene for our
> project or
> write something from scratch that's based on a DB.
>
> We need really good performance. I feel lucene can do our job very
> well,
> some of our guys feel using a DB based search can give us greater
> performance on the type of search we do.
>
>
> Anson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Florian Sauvin [mailto:florian@archive.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:55 AM
> To: Lucene Users List
> Subject: Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
>
>
> On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
>
>> Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
>> trying to Lucene for -- "why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
>> index to do that" -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
>> realized I don't have a great answer.
>>
>> MySQL builds inverted indexes for (in theory) doing the same type of
>> lookup that lucene does. You'd maybe have to build some kind of a
>> layer
>> on the front to mimic Lucene's analyzers, but that wouldn't be too
>> hard....
>>
>> My only experience with MySQLfulltext is trivial test apps -- but the
>> MySQL world does have some significant advantages (its a known
>> quantity
>> from an operations perspective, etc)..... Does anyone out there have
>> anything more concrete they can add?
>>
>> --tim
>>
>>
>
> I'd say that MySQL full text is much slower if you have a lot of
> data... that is one of the reasons we started using lucene (We had a
> mysql db to do the search), it's way faster!
>
>
> --
>
> Florian
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
Posted by Anson Lau <al...@fulfil-net.com>.
Depending on what MySQL Full-text search support you probably will lose some
of the advance things you get for free from Lucene, such as proximity
search, wildcard search, search term and search field boosting, scoring of
the documents, etc.
Afterall it depends on what you need to do. In our dev team we are actually
currently having a mini debate over whether to use lucene for our project or
write something from scratch that's based on a DB.
We need really good performance. I feel lucene can do our job very well,
some of our guys feel using a DB based search can give us greater
performance on the type of search we do.
Anson
-----Original Message-----
From: Florian Sauvin [mailto:florian@archive.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:55 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
> Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
> trying to Lucene for -- "why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
> index to do that" -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
> realized I don't have a great answer.
>
> MySQL builds inverted indexes for (in theory) doing the same type of
> lookup that lucene does. You'd maybe have to build some kind of a
> layer
> on the front to mimic Lucene's analyzers, but that wouldn't be too
> hard....
>
> My only experience with MySQLfulltext is trivial test apps -- but the
> MySQL world does have some significant advantages (its a known quantity
> from an operations perspective, etc)..... Does anyone out there have
> anything more concrete they can add?
>
> --tim
>
>
I'd say that MySQL full text is much slower if you have a lot of
data... that is one of the reasons we started using lucene (We had a
mysql db to do the search), it's way faster!
--
Florian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene vs. MySQL Full-Text
Posted by Florian Sauvin <fl...@archive.org>.
On Jul 20, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Tim Brennan wrote:
> Someone came into my office today and asked me about the project I am
> trying to Lucene for -- "why aren't you just using a MySQL full-text
> index to do that" -- after thinking about it for a few minutes, I
> realized I don't have a great answer.
>
> MySQL builds inverted indexes for (in theory) doing the same type of
> lookup that lucene does. You'd maybe have to build some kind of a
> layer
> on the front to mimic Lucene's analyzers, but that wouldn't be too
> hard....
>
> My only experience with MySQLfulltext is trivial test apps -- but the
> MySQL world does have some significant advantages (its a known quantity
> from an operations perspective, etc)..... Does anyone out there have
> anything more concrete they can add?
>
> --tim
>
>
I'd say that MySQL full text is much slower if you have a lot of
data... that is one of the reasons we started using lucene (We had a
mysql db to do the search), it's way faster!
--
Florian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org