--- "dan (JIRA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> while ( myopicEngineerStillDoesntGetIt)
> {
>
> case(1)
> {
> A small business running MySQL has a travelling
....
>
> case(2)
> {
> Same scenario. How does team Lucene respond? If you
Dan, do us all a favor and please figure out the
difference between a DATABASE and INDEXING ENGINE, and
quit whining.
Lucene is latter, MySQL former: you can not and should
not expect same feature set from the two. If you need
ACID, use a database. If you need fast full text
search capability, use latter. Although some DBs
bundle full text indexing packages, they are not part
of the DB engine.
If you are storing important (primary) data in Lucene
index, you are just clueless.
There are many ways to implement recoverability of
Lucene indexes; including using BDB backend or having
versioned copies of index files (instead of modifying
existing index as is, make a copy, modify it, flip
when done). But it is just downright silly to demand
database features from a non-database: the core to
good products is focusing on core features.
Catastrophic failure recovery is not a core feature
for indexing engines.
-+ Tatu +-
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
