what is the diff between katta and solrcloud?

[Sean Bigdatafun]

 Are their goal fudanmentally different at all or just different approaches
to solve the same problem (sharding)? Can someone give a technical review?

Thanks,
--Sean

Re: what is the diff between katta and solrcloud?

[Sean Bigdatafun]

Otis,

Any pointer to an architecture view of either system?
Thanks,
Sean


On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Otis Gospodnetic <
otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sean,
>
> First 2 things that come to mind:
> * Katta keeps shards on HDFS and they then get deployed to regular
> servers/FS
> * SolrCloud doesn't involve HDFS at all.
>
> * Katta is a Lucene-level system
> * SolrCloud is a Solr-level system
>
> Both make heavy use of ZooKeeper.
>
> Otis
> 
> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>
>
>
> - Original Message 
> > From: Sean Bigdatafun 
> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Sent: Mon, January 17, 2011 4:06:59 PM
> > Subject: what is the diff between katta and solrcloud?
> >
> > Are their goal fudanmentally different at all or just different
> approaches
> > to  solve the same problem (sharding)? Can someone give a technical
>  review?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Sean
> >
>



-- 
--Sean

Re: SolrCloud Feedback

[Sean Bigdatafun]

Could you please give a pointer to the SolrCloud architecture?

Could you please give a comprehensive explanation between it and Katta?
 * targetted app difference?
 * scalability difference?
 * flexibility difference and so on

Thanks,
Sean

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Mark Miller  wrote:

> Hello Users,
>
> About a little over a year ago, a few of us started working on what we
> called SolrCloud.
>
> This initial bit of work was really a combination of laying some base work
> - figuring out how to integrate ZooKeeper with Solr in a limited way,
> dealing with some infrastructure - and picking off some low hanging search
> side fruit.
>
> The next step is the indexing side. And we plan on starting to tackle that
> sometime soon.
>
> But first - could you help with some feedback?ISome people are using our
> SolrCloud start - I have seen evidence of it ;) Some, even in production.
>
> I would love to have your help in targeting what we now try and improve.
> Any suggestions or feedback? If you have sent this before, I/others likely
> missed it - send it again!
>
> I know anyone that has used SolrCloud has some feedback. I know it because
> I've used it too ;) It's too complicated to setup still. There are still
> plenty of pain points. We accepted some compromise trying to fit into what
> Solr was, and not wanting to dig in too far before feeling things out and
> letting users try things out a bit. Thinking that we might be able to adjust
> Solr to be more in favor of SolrCloud as we go, what is the ideal state of
> the work we have currently done?
>
> If anyone using SolrCloud helps with the feedback, I'll help with the
> coding effort.
>
> - Mark Miller
> -- lucidimagination.com




-- 
--Sean

difference between geospatial search from database angle and from solr angle

[Sean Bigdatafun]

I understand Solr can do pretty powerful geospatial search
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-spatial/

But I also
understand lots of DB researchers have done lots of geospatial related work,
can someone give an overview of the difference from the different angel?

Thanks,
-- 
--Sean

Re: difference between geospatial search from database angle and from solr angle

[Sean Bigdatafun]

Thanks, David.

I am thinking of a scenario that billions of objects, whose indices are too
big for a single machine to serve the indexing, to serve the querying. Is
there any sharding mechanism?


Can you give a comparison between solr-based geospatial search and PostGIS
based geospatial search?
  * scalability
  * functionality richness
  * incremental indexing (re-indexing) cost
  * query cost
  * sharding scheme support



On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:42 PM, David Smiley (@MITRE.org)  wrote:

> Sean,
>Geospatial search in Lucene/Solr is of course implemented based on
> Lucene's underlying index technology. That technology was originally just
> for text but it's been adapted very successfully for numerics and querying
> ranges too. The only mature geospatial field type in Solr 3.1 is LatLonType
> which under the hood is simply a pair of latitude & longitude numeric
> fields.  There really isn't anything sophisticated (geospatially speaking)
> in Solr 3.1. I'm not sure what sort of geospatial DB research you have in
> mind but I would expect other systems would be free to use an indexing
> strategy designed for spatial such as "R-Trees". Nevertheless, I think
> Lucene offers the underlying primitives to compete with systems using other
> technologies.  Case in point is my patch SOLR-2155 which indexes a single
> point in the form of a "geohash" at multiple resolutions (geohash lengths
> AKA spatial prefixes / grids) and uses a recursive algorithm to efficiently
> query an arbitrary shape.  It's quite fast and bests LatLonType already;
> and
> there's a lot more I can do to make it faster.
>This is definitely a field of interest and a growing one in the
> Lucene/Solr community.  There are even some external spatial providers
> (JTeam, MetaCarta) and I'm partnering with other individuals to create a
> new
> one.  Expect to see more in the coming months.  If you're looking for some
> specific geospatial capabilities then let us know.
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Author: http://www.packtpub.com/solr-1-4-enterprise-search-server/
>
> -
>  Author: https://www.packtpub.com/solr-1-4-enterprise-search-server/book
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/difference-between-geospatial-search-from-database-angle-and-from-solr-angle-tp2788442p2788972.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>



-- 
--Sean