Storing content in large indexes can significantly add to index time. The model of indexing fields only in Lucene and storing just a key, and then storing the content in some other container (DBMS, NoSql, etc) with the key as lookup is almost a necessity for this use case unless you have a completely static index (create once + never add to).
Thanks, Glen On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Konstantyn Smirnov <inject...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > apologies, if this question was already asked before. > > If I need to store a lot of data (say, millions of documents), what would > perform better (in terms of reads/writes/scalability etc.): Lucene with > stored fields (Field.Store.YES) or another NoSql DB like Mongo or Couch? > > Does it make sense to index and store the data separately? > > TIA > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Performance-of-storing-data-in-Lucene-vs-other-No-SQL-Databases-tp3984704.html > Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > -- - http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/ - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
