I don't think so. Each seach is based on a single collection. I don't believe that sub-collections are considered as part of the parent. So, my guess, and it is only a guess, is that it won't search them.
Mark Nutan Kaul wrote: > Hi, > If my collection has many sub collections. Then, can they be included in the > same search? > Thanks, > > Nutan > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark J. Stang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <xindice-users@xml.apache.org> > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:15 PM > Subject: Re: Advice on DB Design Wanted > > > Dan, > > >From what I have done using XPath to search collections, you can't search > > more than one collection at a time. Which would meant that if you needed > to > > search all, then you would have to run the search against each individual > > collection. People have built collections with hundreds of thousands of > > documents and the search time is fast if you index them. > > > > So, what kind of search do you want to do? XPath provides a "contains" > but > > as I understand it, that will search every tag and you can't index them. > If you > > can pick out tags and index those then your search will be under a second. > > Tom Bradford is working on a full text search, but that is not ready yet. > > > > So it appears that you have several choices. > > > > 1) Sub-collections - as long as the number of documents and content is > small, fast searches. > > But no way to search all collections at once. > > > > 2) One collection, use "contains", fast as long as your data doesn't get > too big too quick. > > Wait for Tom Bradford to come up with Full Text Search capability. > > > > 3) One collection, pick out specific tags, index those, fast for all index > searches, slower for > > "contains". > > > > 4) Use a third-party tool (apache has one) to index your documents as you > add/edit/delete them. > > Use it to find your document and then do a direct access. Fast, a little > more complicated, but > > you can implement it now. Also, when Tom is done, you can discard it and > transfer the maintenance > > to Xindice. > > > > HTH, > > > > Mark > > > > Dan Barron wrote: > > > > > I have an idea and I was just wondering what you all thought about it. > Here's the deal: > > > > > > We are going to use Xindice to store XML data for scientific journal > citations. The simplest idea is to just dump them all in one collection and > use XPath to find what we need. But most times, they would be searched by > journal name and volume. > > > > > > So what I'm thinking is if I create a subcollection for each journal, > and then collections for each volume say under that, there would only be a > few dozen articles in each collection. And since you search first by getting > a collection and then searching, I'm guessing this would be much faster and > could effectively eliminate the need for indexers on journal name and > volume. And presumably I could still search the entire collection when > necessary using the base collection. > > > > > > So I'm thinking search the /db/citations/JAMA/132 collection of a few > dozen documents would be way faster than searching /db/citations where > altogether there would be hundreds of thousands of documents. > > > > > > Does this make any sense? Will it be faster? Am I missing any obvious > problems with this approach? Any ideas would be appreciated. > > > > > > dan > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > > Daniel W. Barron > > > Senior Systems Analyst/Application Developer > > > American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine > > > Tel: (215) 351-2617 Tel: (800) 523-1546 x2617 > > > Fax: (215) 351-2644 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > Mark J Stang > > Architect > > Cybershop Systems > > > > -- Mark J Stang Architect Cybershop Systems
begin:vcard n:Stang;Mark x-mozilla-html:TRUE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] fn:Mark Stang end:vcard
