lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com>
Subject Re: Adding pdf/word file using JSON/XML
Date Sun, 16 Jun 2013 20:16:01 GMT
Hi,

I've never heard the complaint that Solr is hard to use. To the contrary, most people I come
across have downloaded Solr themselves, walked through the tutorial and praise the simplicity
with which they can start indexing and searching content.

When they come to us asking for consultancy or training, they are already in love with the
product, they use it but realize that great search is so much more than just getting the HTTP
requests or XML right. So while any "average Java developer" will be able to download and
use Solr within an hour or two (my statement - even PHP developers can do that :-) ), that's
just the beginning of it all.

With your reasoning, all software for which training classes exist are bad and hard to use.
Our training classes do not focus on the technology itself, but best practices to achieve
good search user experience *using* Solr. This is a skill not even seasoned SQL developers
have.

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com

15. juni 2013 kl. 21:39 skrev Jack Krupansky <jack@basetechnology.com>:

> [My apologies to Roland for "hijacking" his original thread for this rant! Look what
you started!!]
> 
> And I will stand by my statement: "Solr is too much of a beast for average app developers
to master."
> 
> And the key word there, in case a too-casual reader missed it is "master" - not "use"
in the sense of hack something together or solving a niche application for a typical Solr
deployment, but master in the sense of having a high level of confidence about the vast bulk
(even if not absolutely 100%) of the subject matter, Solr itself.
> 
> I mean, generally, on average what percentage of Solr's many features  has the average
Solr app-deployer actually "mastered"?
> 
> And, what I am really referring to is not what expertise the pioneers and "expert" Solr
solution consultants have had, but the level of expertise required for those who are to come
in the years ahead who simply want to focus on their application without needing to become
a "Solr expert" first.
> 
> The context of my statement was the application "devs" referenced earlier in this thread
who were struggling because the Solr API was not 100% pure RESTful. As the respondent indicated,
they were much happier to have a cleaner, more RESTful API that they as app developers can
deal with, so that they wouldn't have to "master" all of the bizarre inconsistencies of Solr
itself (e.g., just the knowledge that SolrCell doesn't support partial/atomic update.)
> 
> And, the real focus of my statement, again in this particular context" is the actual
application devs, the guys focused on the actual application subject matter itself, not the
"Solr Experts" or "Solr solution architects" who do have a lot higher mastery of Solr than
the "average" application devs.
> 
> And if my statement were in fact false, questions such as began this thread would never
have come up. The level of traffic for Solr User would be essentially zero if it were really
true that average application developers can easily "master" Solr.
> 
> And there would be zero need so many of these Solr training classes if Solr were so easy
to "master". In fact, the very existence of so many Solr training classes effectively proves
my point. And that's just for "basic" Solr, not any of the many esoteric points such as at
the heart of this particular thread (i.e., SolrCell not supporting partial/atomic update.)
> 
> And, in conclusion, my real interest is in helping the many "average" application developers
who post inquiries on this Solr user list for the simple reason that they ARE in fact "struggling"
with Solr.
> 
> Personally, I would suggest that a typical (average) successful deployer of Solr would
be more readily characterized as having "survived" the Solr deployment process rather than
having achieved a truly deep "mastery" of Solr. They may have achieved confidence about exactly
what they have deployed, but do they also have great confidence that they know exactly what
will happen if they make slight and subtle changes or what exactly the fix will be for certain
runtime errors? For the "average application developer" I'm talking about, not the elite expert
Solr consultants.
> 
> One final way of putting it. If a manager or project leader wanted to staff a dev position
to be "in-house Solr expert", can they just hire any old average Java programmer with no Solr
experience and expect that he will rapidly "master" Solr?
> 
> I mean, why would so many recruiters be looking for a "Solr expert" or engaging the services
of Solr sonsultancies if mastery of Solr by "average application developers" was a reality?!
> 
> [I want to hear Otis' take on this!]
> 
> -- Jack Krupansky
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Grant Ingersoll
> Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:47 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Adding pdf/word file using JSON/XML
> 
> 
> On Jun 15, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org> wrote:
>>> That being said, it truly amazes me that people were ever able to implement Solr,
given some of the FUD in this thread.  I guess those tens of thousands of deployments out
there were all done by above average devs...
>> 
>> I would not classify the thread as FUD.
> 
> I was just referring to the part about how Solr isn't something average devs can do,
which I think is FUD.
> 
> At any rate, I think the ExtractingReqHandler could be updated to allow for metadata,
etc. to be passed in with the raw document itself and a patch would be welcome.  It's something
the literals stand in for now as a lightweight proxy, but clearly there is an opportunity
for more to be passed in.= 


Mime
View raw message