Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Search Engine [moved] #82

Closed
lvca opened this issue Dec 10, 2012 · 5 comments
Closed

Search Engine [moved] #82

lvca opened this issue Dec 10, 2012 · 5 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@lvca
Copy link
Member

lvca commented Dec 10, 2012

This is Issue 82 moved from a Google Code project.
Added by 2010-07-29T16:03:35.000Z by l.garu...@gmail.com.
Please review that bug for more context and additional comments, but update this bug.

Original labels: Type-Enhancement, Priority-Medium, v2.0.0

Original description

After the implementation of the Full Text index against class properties, it's relatively easy to provide a central "Search Engine" that index Orient documents following some configuration like:
- classes/properties to index
- custom StopWord list
- custom events called at every indexing phase to better control the indexing with custom rules
@HenrikSkriver
Copy link

Hi Luca
I tracked this issue and issue 21 from google code to here. It was planned for release 2.0.0 but now it does not seem to be part of the next two 2.x milestones.
Can you please elaborate a bit on the reasoning behind?
I know that it is probably hard to prioritise all the issues but I am just interested in hearing the reason for postponing it. Is it due to lack of time for instance or your customers feedback?
Any thoughts you have on the future for this feature will be appreciated.
Thanks in advance
Regards Henrik Skriver Rasmussen

@lvca
Copy link
Member Author

lvca commented Jul 2, 2013

Sorry Henrik, some users plugged Lucene and for this purpose, so this is at low priority right now.

@HenrikSkriver
Copy link

That sounds great - provided they shared their solution somewhere. :)
We are using Lucene in other contexts anyway so that is fine.
But I was interesting in knowing how tight the integration was done or if it was just planned for later.
Thank you for the answer.
Any link or pointer to the solution using Lucene is most appreciated or even just hints how it can be done.
I have seen some mentioning of hooks which might be used to populate a Lucene index - but I am not exactly sure if that was in this context though.
Neo4j automatically indexes all props as far as I figured - so that would be nice to do also.
However, being 100% open source as Orient is, is very important and the winning argument in our optics. ;)
Thanks in advance.

@lvca
Copy link
Member Author

lvca commented Jul 2, 2013

You should create a hook and in onAfterCreate/Update/Delete populate Lucene via Java API. If you've Lucene skill it's matter of few hours.

@lvca lvca modified the milestones: 1.7, 2.1 Apr 10, 2014
@lvca lvca added 1 - Next and removed 2 - Working labels Apr 10, 2014
@lvca lvca removed the 0 - Backlog label Aug 1, 2014
@lvca lvca modified the milestones: 2.0rc1, 2.1 Aug 28, 2014
@lvca lvca modified the milestones: 2.2, 2.1 Feb 1, 2015
@lvca lvca removed the ETA: 2days label Mar 1, 2015
@wolf4ood wolf4ood modified the milestones: 3.0, 2.2 Sep 18, 2015
lvca added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 15, 2015
Allow metadata field in indexes defined in output section
@lvca lvca assigned robfrank and unassigned wolf4ood May 13, 2016
@robfrank
Copy link
Contributor

OLD STUFF. Lucene integrated,

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants