The solution will be an UpdateRequestProcessor (which itself is pluggable).I am implementing a JDBC based one. I'll test with H2 and MySql (and may be Derby)
We will ship the H2 (embedded) jar On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:53 PM, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Again, I would hope that solr builds a storage agnostic solution. > > As long as we have a simple interface to load/store documents, it should be > easy to write a JDBC/ehcache/disk/Cassandra/whatever implementation. > > ryan > > > On Dec 4, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् wrote: > >> Cassandra does not meet our requirements. >> we do not need that kind of scalability >> >> Moreover its future is uncertain and they are trying to incubate it into >> Solr >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Sami Siren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Yet another possibility: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Cassandra >>> >>> It at least claims to be scalable, no personal experience. >>> >>> -- >>> Sami Siren >>> >>> Noble Paul ??????? ?????? wrote: >>>> >>>> Another persistence solution is ehcache with diskstore. It even has >>>> replication >>>> >>>> I have never used ehcache . So I cannot comment on it >>>> >>>> any comments? >>>> >>>> --Noble >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Noble Paul ??????? ?????? >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 1:28 AM, Noble Paul ??????? ?????? wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The code can be written against JDBC. But we need to test the DDL and >>>>>>> data types on al the supported DBs >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But , which one would we like to ship with Solr as a default option? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Why do we need a default option? Is this something that is intended >>>>>> to >>>>>> be >>>>>> on by default? Or, do you mean just to have one for unit tests to >>>>>> work? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Default does not mean that it is enabled bby default. But if it is >>>>> enabled I can have defaults for stuff like driver, url , DDL etc. And >>>>> the user may not need to provide an extra jar >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know if it is still the case, but I often find embedded dbs to >>>>>> be >>>>>> quite annoying since you often can't connect to them from other >>>>>> clients >>>>>> outside of the JVM which makes debugging harder. Of course, maybe I >>>>>> just >>>>>> don't know the tricks to do it. Derby is one DB that you can still >>>>>> connect >>>>>> to even when it is embedded. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Embedded is the best bet for us because of performance reasons and >>>>> zero management. >>>>> The users can still read the data through Solr itself . >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, whatever is chosen needs to scale to millions of documents, and >>>>>> I >>>>>> wonder about an embedded DB doing that. I also have a hard time >>>>>> believing >>>>>> that both a DB w/ millions of docs and Solr can live on the same >>>>>> machine, >>>>>> which is presumably what an embedded DB must do. Presumably, it also >>>>>> needs >>>>>> to be able to be replicated, right? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> millions of docs.? >>>>> then you must configure a remote DB for storage reasons >>>>> and must manage the replication separately >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H2 looks impressive. the jar (small) is just 667KB and the memory >>>>>>> footprint is small too >>>>>>> --Noble >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> check http://www.h2database.com/ in my view the best embedded DB >>>>>>>> out >>>>>>>> there. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> from the maker of HSQLDB... is second round. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, from anything solr, I would hope it would just rely on >>>>>>>> JDBC. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:08 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> HSQLDB has a limit of upto 8GB of data. In Solr, you might want to >>>>>>>>> go >>>>>>>>> beyond >>>>>>>>> that without a commit. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Dawid Weiss >>>>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Isn't HSQLDB an option? Its performance ranges a lot depending on >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> volume of data and queries, but otherwise the license looks >>>>>>>>>> BSDish. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://hsqldb.org/web/hsqlLicense.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dawid >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>> Shalin Shekhar Mangar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> --Noble Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------------------------- >>>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>>> >>>>>> Lucene Helpful Hints: >>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance >>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> --Noble Paul >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> --Noble Paul > > -- --Noble Paul
