Steve Ross
3/14/2008 11:23:00 PM
On Mar 14, 2008, at 7:24 AM, astonerbum@gmail.com wrote:
> Has anyone run any comparisons between Ferret and Lucene 2.3.1?
>
> I saw many comparisons between older versions claiming Ferret is 2x
> faster but these are outdated and I cannot use these metrics to make
> any sort of decisions. Lucene is claiming to have made major speed
> improvements in version 2.3. While my company is looking into Lucene
> 2.3.1, I am trying to see if Ferret being faster and quite possibly
> better than Lucene is a better direction (also I'd get a chance to
> plug Ruby into the system :))
>
> If anyone has done any metrics recently can you please post the
> results you have, also please indicate how much time was spent
> optimizing Lucene and Ferret, or only minimal optimizations were
> attempted.
>
> Thanks in advance to anyone who posts.
Which one gives you higher quality search results? Ferret is supposed
to be a port of Lucene, but Lucene *is* Lucene. Better? Worse? The
same? I don't know, but I'd rather be a bit slower and get more
relevant matches and if the result set is different that would be my
main decision point. I've tried acts_as_ferret and acts_as_solr in
Rails apps and for the simple case where the data is pretty different,
one record to the next, the results are pretty good. It's where you
have clustering that a problem can occur. (Think about indexing topics
about Ruby that contain words similar to "active".)
HTH