 |
 |
Roy, we're in the middle of re-indexing, and there's some broken code in the search that won't be fixed until after Martin returns from vacation. Plus, we're working on UI right now...it will be much more readable very soon. So I would suggest not sending him the link quite yet. Within 2 - 3 weeks I suspect we can start giving out sneak previews though. --C Roy Tennant wrote: > Short answer now, longer/better answer next week when someone gets > back in the office. We have 4.5 million records indexed at the > moment, but have had up to 9 million indexed. Our dev system runs on > a Unix server (specs to come) that runs other apps as well. I'm not > sure if we can share the crude search interface so you can judge the > response, but will try to find out. > Roy > > On Dec 2, 2005, at 12:36 PM, Andrew Nagy wrote: > >> Roy Tennant wrote: >> >>> Andrew, just as an additional data point, we have millions of records >>> indexed in our Lucene-based XTF system, and the response isn't too >>> bad even on a development server. >> >> >> Can you and others on this list briefly describe your hardware >> platform >> for this? I am assuming this is not running on an old 486 that is >> lying >> around in your office :) >> >> Do you feel that the searching is processor intensive and may be best >> suited for a load balanced infrastructure? I am implementing my pilot >> using eXist which stores the XML Database in B Trees which from my >> knowledge is an in memory data structure so therefor the machine would >> need lots of ram however I am curious as to the processing >> requirements. >> >> Thanks, you guys rock! >> >> Andrew >>