Subject Re: [firebird-support] Re: Full Text Searching For Firebird
Author Alexandre Benson Smith
martinthrelly wrote:

>hello alexandre thanks for the reply
>our application is held on a server. ive researched a bit about
>dotlucene. however this article put me off a bit.
>basically they are saying that dotlucene is fine if your data is
>static. but if its being hit and updated all the time you risk
>concurrency issues between the database data and the dotlucene data.
>this for me is a big worry.
>what do you make of this? do you have any other suggestions? do you
>know if firebird intend to include a full text search in a future
>release? thanks
Hi Martin,

In a future release FB will support Full Text Search, but in wich
release I don't know.

Why don't you give a try to it, or contact the author of the link I sent
to you to know his impression and how it could be used with FB ?

now commenting on what I read on the link you pointed:

Taking this two posts:
Some time ago I was trying to figure out whether the solution explained
in the article, "Fulltext Search for Firebird SQL"
( )
integrated dotLucene into Firebird in a way that made it usable from
Firebird SQL. Title of the article makes it sound that way, but I
couldn't tell how it would work from the article or from quick look at
the code, and I never set it up to figure out exactly how it worked.

I was hoping that it provided a fulltext index interface for Firebird
SQL that was something like the way tsearch2 is integrated into

I don't see a big benefit to putting lucene index in firebird db unless
you can then query it from SQL. But I can't see how you do that with
approach in article. Anyone care to explain?
Herbert Sitz Send private email
terça-feira, 18 de outubro de 2005
Herbert, it looks like the author has written a Directory implementation
for DotLucene to store the index in a table in the Firebird database.
[Lucene stores its indexes in an abstracted 'Directory' can sit on
the filesystem, be loaded into RAM, or exist (read only) on a remote
HTTP server.]

This won't help you integrate with the database (you'll still have to
use one of the approaches I outlined above), but it might be more
convenient for storing your index, rather than using the filesystem.

The title of the article is misleading, IMHO.
Luke Francl <>
terça-feira, 18 de outubro de 2005


I think the title of the article I sent to you is really misleading, I
though it integrate in somewaty to FB, maybe using a Lucene API that
will query de FB Database to retrieve a bunch of records ID's and then
performing the query in FB and making joins, etc.

In this page someone said that will be easier to create a FB UDF that
gets the result of Lucene in some ind of "tabular data" it's not
possible to write UDF's that return such information, UDF returns simple
values, of course the value could be a form o list to be used with th IN
operator something like ('13, 23, 45, 1002, 342987') but you will need
to feed in another SQL with string concatenation, no UDF coudl return a
list of values (AFAIK)

So, from what I read in the link you sent, lucene does not apear to be a
good choice to be used with FB.

I though it works a bit diferently. :-(

see you !

Alexandre Benson Smith
THOR Software e Comercial Ltda
Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil