An essential problem is that Solr does not let you update just one field. When an ad changes from active to inactive, you have to reindex the whole document. If you have large documents (large text fields for example) this is a big pain.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 5:37 AM, kenf_nc <ken.fos...@realestate.com> wrote: > > You don't give an indication of size. How large are the documents being > indexed and how many of them are there. However, my opinion would be a > single index with an 'active' flag. In your queries you can use > FilterQueries (fq=) to optimize on just active if you wish, or just > inactive if that is necessary. > > For the RDBMS, do you have any other reason to use a RDBMS besides storing > this data inbetween indexes? Do you need to make relational queries that > Solr can't handle? If not, then I think a file based approach may be better. > Or, as in my case, a small DB for generating/tracking unique_ids and > last_update_datetimes, but the bulk of the data is archived in files and can > easily be updated or read and indexed. > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Index-partitioned-Full-indexing-by-MSSQL-or-MySQL-tp1515572p1516763.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com
