On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Lukáš Vlček <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > question regarding the Blur data ingestion focus: > > Do I read it correctly that Blur is not near-real time system (like both ES > and Solr are)? For example would Blur be a valid candidate for aggregated > logging use case? How long does it usually take for indexed data to become > searchable (ms, sec, mins)?
Blur does suport NRT (like ES & Solr) in a couple ways - take a look at the various "mutate" methods of the service[1]. Using mutate you'll see changes directly, for your logging use case, perhaps the bulkMutate[Start | Add | Finish] would be more appropriate though. > As for retention of the data what are the strategies to drop old data from > the index? For example is there anything like dropping old data based on > index name patters (given the index name contains timestamp)? Unfortunately right now, it'd be an application-specific approach [again, using mutations] - there's nothing built-in to age-off old data. Thanks, --tim [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/blur/docs/0.2.4/Blur.html#Fn_Blur_query
