lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arjen van der Meijden <>
Subject Re: Not-indexed, Stored Thumbnails or NoSQL?
Date Sun, 02 Dec 2018 12:17:02 GMT
I'd think it depends on your application.

If its a web-application and you're generating html, it may be better
for the (client side) performance to have those images load via a
webserver that can directly access the images as files (altough you
could generate the images inline with base64). If its some application
that has to load and display an image itself, than having easy control
over the entire document will likely outweigh most potential advantages
of a second database.

Btw, Lucene can be considered a NoSQL-storage ;) If you really do get
milllions of documents, it may be interesting to store them elsewhere if
otherwise the database gets too large (but see Uwe's reply for ways to
reduce the storage-overhead).

Best regards,


On 2-12-2018 10:20, Joe MA wrote:
> Greetings,
> I have an index where I import documents such as powerpoint, PDF, and so forth.  One
nice feature I added is that for each document, I store a thumbnail of the first page as an
encoded String (uuencode) using a stored,not-indexed field.  This thumbnail gets displayed
when the user finds a document.   
> I am wondering if, as the size of the index grows to perhaps hundreds of thousands if
not millions of documents,  how efficient is this?  Is it a good idea?
> These encoded strings could be several hundred bytes in size, and of course are completely
unique for each file indexed, and provide no 'search' value.  On the surface, it seems like
there could be a better way to do this given the size, as well as the extra retrieval time
for Lucene to pull these fields for found documents.
> Since I also have a unique hash for each document in the index, it would not be too difficult
to set up a separate, independent NoSQL key/value store with the thumbnail images, such as
MongoDB or similar, and then retrieve the thumbnails from that store instead of keeping them
in the Lucene index.  Does this seem like a better approach? Or is Lucene stored field retrieval
efficient enough that there would be no benefit to doing this?  Any other ideas?
> Thanks in advance,
> J
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message