mg4j is a nice project. It is missing the incremental aspects as well.The "older" paper this experiment mentioned contains lucene-mg4j comparisons.
-John On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Earwin Burrfoot <ear...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd say out of these libraries only Lucene and Sphinx are worth mentioning. > > There's also MG4J, which wasn't covered and has a nice algorithmic > background. > Anybody knows other interesting open-source search engines? > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 00:39, John Wang<john.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Vik did a very nice job. > > One thing the experiment did not mention is that Lucene handles > incremental > > updates, whereas many of the other "competitors" do not. So the indexing > > performance comparison is not really fair. > > -John > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > http://zooie.wordpress.com/2009/07/06/a-comparison-of-open-source-search-engines-and-indexing-twitter/ > >> > >> I imagine many of you already saw this -- Lucene does pretty well in > >> this "shootout". > >> The only area it tended to lag, it seems, is memory usage and speed in > >> some cases. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > > > > > > > -- > Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (ear...@gmail.com) > Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423 > ICQ: 104465785 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
