Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
От | Oleg Bartunov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.63.0512062001300.13553@ra.sai.msu.su обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene (Michael Riess <mlriess@gmx.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Folks, tsearch2 and Lucene are very different search engines, so it'd be unfair comparison. If you need full access to metadata and instant indexing you, probably, find tsearch2 is more suitable then Lucene. But, if you could live without that features and need to search read only archives you need Lucene. Tsearch2 integration into pgsql would be cool, but, I see no problem to use tsearch2 as an official extension module. After completing our todo, which we hope will likely happens for 8.2 release, you could forget about Lucene and other engines :) We'll be available for developing in spring and we estimate about three months for our todo, so, it's really doable. Oleg On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Michael Riess wrote: > >> Has anyone ever compared TSearch2 to Lucene, as far as performance is >> concerned? > > I'll stay away from TSearch2 until it is fully integrated in the postgres > core (like "create index foo_text on foo (texta, textb) USING TSearch2"). > Because a full integration is unlikely to happen in the near future (as far > as I know), I'll stick to Lucene. > > Mike > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq > Regards, Oleg _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: