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 Fri, 01 Aug 2014 08:53:28 GMT
Thank you Charlie, very informative even if non-scientific.

About the aggregations, are they very different from:
http://heliosearch.org/solr-facet-functions/ (obviously not yet
production ready)?

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 Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Charlie Hull <charlie@flax.co.uk> wrote:
> On 01/08/2014 06:43, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote:
>>
>> Maybe Charlie Hull can answer that:
>> https://twitter.com/FlaxSearch/status/494859596117602304 . He seems to
>> think that - at least in some cases - Solr is faster.
>
>
> I'll try to expand on the tweet.
>
> Firstly, this is a totally unscientific comparison - we'd like to have time
> to develop a proper public demonstration of some of the performance
> differences we've found, which hopefully we will soon...so this is far more
> anecdotal than statistical! Our eventual intention is to publicise any
> differences so the wider community can tell us if we've done something
> wrong, or maybe improve one or both engines. Don't get me wrong, we *like*
> the fact there are two cool search server projects built on Lucene!
>
> I can think of three recent projects where we've compared the two - we
> wanted to be sure we were using the best fit for our clients:
> 1. a search over 40-50 million news stories with relatively complex
> filtering requirements - Although ES promised more granular filtering it was
> a lot slower to do it. We chose Solr.
> 2. a pretty standard intranet search over a few million items that might
> require some clever visualisation in a future phase. No real difference in
> speed, we chose ES.
> 3. a search over 700k items in the recruitment space with some geolocation
> filtering - ES seemed to be faster at indexing, but Solr was a lot faster
> for searching, and probably will be equivalent at indexing once we do some
> tuning. We chose Solr.
>
> Others have told me that if your documents are rich, choose Solr: if however
> you have a large number of more simple documents, choose ES as the scaling
> is less painful. If you like old-school XML config, choose Solr: if you're a
> bearded hipster running a startup in Shoreditch choose ES. The aggregations
> in ES are *way* cool.
>
> YMMV, of course. The *only* sensible way to choose is to try both with your
> data and requirements. Benchmarks are all very well, but they don't
> necessarily apply to your situation.
>
> Cheers
>
> Charlie
>
>
>>
>> I am also doing a talk and a book on Solr vs. ElasticSearch, but I am
>> not really planning to address those issues either, only the feature
>> comparisons.
>>
>> 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 Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:35 PM, 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
>
>
>
> --
> Charlie Hull
> Flax - Open Source Enterprise Search
>
> tel/fax: +44 (0)8700 118334
> mobile:  +44 (0)7767 825828
> web: www.flax.co.uk

Mime
View raw message