lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Faceting : what are the limitations of Taxonomy (Separate index and hierarchical facets) and SortedSetDocValuesFacetField ( flat facets and no sidecar index) ?
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2016 11:04:31 GMT
Hi

The reason IMO is historic - ES and Solr had faceting solutions before
Lucene had it. There were discussions in the past about using the Lucene
faceting module in Solr (can't tell for ES) but, sadly, I can't say I see
it happening at this point.

Regarding your other question, IMO the Lucene faceting engine, in terms of
performance and customizability, is on par with Solr/ES. However, it lacks
distributed faceting support and aggregations. Since many people use
Solr/ES and not Lucene directly, the Solr/ES faceting module continues to
advance separately from the Lucene one.

Enhancing Lucene facets with aggregations and even distributed faceting
capabilities is mostly a matter of time and priorities. If you're
interested in it, I'd be willing to collaborate with you on that as much as
I can!

And I'd still hope that this work finds its way into Solr/ES, as I think
it's silly to have that many number of faceting implementations, where they
all rely on the same low-level data structure - Lucene!

Shai


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:32 PM Kumaran Ramasubramanian <kums.134@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>             We all know that Lucene supports faceting by providing
> Taxonomy(Separate index and hierarchical facets) and
> SortedSetDocValuesFacetField ( flat facets and no sidecar index).
>
>       Then why did solr and elastic search go for its own implementation ?
>  ( that is, solr uses block join & elasticsearch uses aggregations ) Is
> there any limitations in lucene's implementation ?
>
>
> --
> Kumaran R
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message