From: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
---|---|
To: | Hannes Dorbath <light(at)theendofthetunnel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TSearch vs. Homebrew |
Date: | 2006-06-27 16:13:20 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.63.0606272008360.2921@ra.sai.msu.su |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Hannes Dorbath wrote:
> On 27.06.2006 13:31, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Hannes Dorbath wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.symfony-project.com/askeet/21
>>>
>>> How does this dead simple approach compare to TSearch performance /
>>> scaling wise?
>>
>> You miss the main point in tsearch2 - full integration with database, i.e.,
>> full access to metadata, ACID..... Lucene has no of these features, so it
>> could use some well known optimization
>> and, and so, scales better. If you don't need ACID, metadata access, why
>> do you need database at all ?
>
> Yes, I know the benefits of using TSearch :) (I'm using it on many projects)
> I just found that article and wondered how well this simple approach might
> scale. Sorry for wasting your time ;)
Sorry, I was a bit off-topic. Lucene scales as any inverted index based
engine. In 8.2 tsearch2 also has inverted index support, but we obey
relational approach and couldn't provide a whole set of optimization,
which file based engines could provide.
Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru)
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2006-06-27 16:15:22 | Re: FKs Lock Contention |
Previous Message | Richard Broersma Jr | 2006-06-27 16:09:02 | Re: planning to upgrade to 8.1 |