lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Solr vs ElasticSearch
Date Mon, 04 Aug 2014 06:43:35 GMT
That resource is rather superficial. I wouldn't make big decision based on it.

As to performance, ElasticSearch stores the full submitted content as
_source field. That allows it some extra tricks (like fake-nested
documents), but also has a storage price. You can disable the _source
field, but then some functionality goes away.

Also, ES relies a lot on scripting to replace things that Solr has as
built-in or as compiled classes. Obviously, scripting can be more
flexible, but it is inherently slower. Though I think ES was trying to
make this faster in recent releases.

But yes, in general, the bulk of work happens in Lucene.

Regards,
   Alex.

Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart
Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853


On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Harald Kirsch <Harald.Kirsch@raytion.com> wrote:
> Except if I missed it, nobody yet pointed to
>
> http://solr-vs-elasticsearch.com/
>
> which seems to be fairly up-to-date.
>
> As for performance, I would expect that it is very hard to find one of the
> two technologies to be generally ahead. Except for plain blunders that may
> be lurking in the code, I would think the inner loops, the stuff that really
> burns CPU cycles, all happens in Lucene, which is the same for both.
>
> The differences are more likely to found in operations.
>
> Harald.
>
>
> On 01.08.2014 08:34, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
>>
>> If performance is the main reason, you can stick with Solr.  Both Solr and
>> ES have many knobs to turn for performance, it is impossible to give a
>> direct and correct answer to the question which is faster.
>>
>> Otis
>> --
>> Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics
>> Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Salman Akram <
>> salman.akram@northbaysolutions.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I did see that earlier. My main concern is search
>>> performance/scalability/throughput which unfortunately that article
>>> didn't
>>> address. Any benchmarks or comments about that?
>>>
>>> We are already using SOLR but there has been a push to check
>>> elasticsearch.
>>> All the benchmarks I have seen are at least few years old.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Otis Gospodnetic <
>>> otis.gospodnetic@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Not super fresh, but more recent than the 2 links you sent:
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://blog.sematext.com/2012/08/23/solr-vs-elasticsearch-part-1-overview/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Otis
>>>> --
>>>> Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics
>>>> Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Salman Akram <
>>>> salman.akram@northbaysolutions.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is quite an old discussion. Wanted to check any new comparisons
>>>>
>>>> after
>>>>>
>>>>> SOLR 4 especially with regards to performance/scalability/throughput?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Peter <peathal@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have a look:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2271600/elasticsearch-sphinx-lucene-solr-xapian-which-fits-for-which-usage
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> http://karussell.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/elasticsearch-vs-solr-lucene/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-vs-ElasticSearch-tp3009181p3200492.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Salman Akram
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Salman Akram
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message