[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Loading all of that from all of the docs is like searching
> all of the available tables to get that info. Doable but
> not for the faint of resources. Add full-text to that and it
> becomes a job for Google farms. How well would Google
> work if they weren't cacheing the web?
I guess this is my point. If you indexed your tables with Lucene and
searched on *that* index you would use much less resources and it would
be much faster. But I was talking about XML, which if search required
bringing everything into DOMs, it would be much slower and much more
resource intensive than a RDB.
As for Steve DeRose's stuff -- my brain hurts from reading it...
best,
-Rob
>
> len
>
>
> From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
>
> Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>
>>Then what you want are the equivalent of
>>parameterizable stored queries, somewhat
>>the equivalent of the way engines like
>>Crystal Reports work. Feed them a schema
>>and they will give you back a UI with all of
>>the queriable values from which you select,
>>parameterize and store the queries. It's
>>a report generator for XML documents.
>
>
>
> But wouldn't that require loading *all* the XML docs to be searched into
> memory? (I don't know Crystal Reports) (my work is in a webapp
> environment). Using Lucene provides an extremely fast result set using
> minimal memory.
>
|
