Subject Re: [Firebird-Architect] Re: Full Text Search
Author Lester Caine
davidrushby wrote:

>>Most database people approach search as a SQL boolean. This is too
>>restrictive to be useful. Think Google, not SQL.
> I know exactly nothing about full text search as implemented by
> relational database engines, so this may be a stupid question, but how
> well would a document-centric search infrastructure such as Jakarta
> Lucene ( ) work in the
> context of a relational database engine?

Jakarta Lucene is one of the packages I have looked at, but for me it
has a major drawback - "written entirely in Java" :)

WHAT it is doing is no different to what we want to do. The problem is
HOW it does it - by building a large number of files with all the
various indexes in, and I could not work out just how many files it
needed for a simple index ;)

The only difference between Lucene and an internal full text search is
the management of the index and data.
Quote from their intro
> Did you notice what's not in the above? Lucene handles the indexing, searching and retrieving, but it doesn't handle:
> * managing the process (instantiating the objects and hooking them together, both for indexing and for searching)
> * selecting the data files
> * parsing the data files
> * getting the search string from the user
> * displaying the search results to the user

In other words it only solves half the problem, you still need to
integrate it into a usable management package. No doubt that will come,
and looking at HOW it does some of the steps may well provide guide
lines on what we need to do?

I already do something similar in php, using tables in Firebird with
triggers and UDF's to provide a subset of the functionality, but if that
was handled directly by the engine, then we can concentrate on the user
interface, rather than the plumbing, and hopefully speed performance.

Lester Caine
L.S.Caine Electronic Services