[Dovecot] status & use-case of fts_solr?
i've deployed a Solr server, and setup Dovecot for *both* squat & solr FTS.
iiuc, reading at,
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS http://wiki.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS/Solr
as of dovecot v1.1.2, squat's required for IMAP compliance; solr search breaks it. is that still the case in v1.2? Is IMAP-compliant Solr search possible? planned?
if the goal is fast, indexed FTS of dovecot IMAP stores from within a MUA, is fts_solr even helpful? or is it targeted for web interfaces to search ... ?
thanks.
On Oct 8, 2009, at 10:51 PM, PGNet Dev wrote:
as of dovecot v1.1.2, squat's required for IMAP compliance; solr search breaks it. is that still the case in v1.2? Is IMAP-compliant Solr search possible? planned?
It's just not possible, because it doesn't support substring searches.
But then again, perhaps no one cares. It's not like gmail's search is
IMAP compliant either.
if the goal is fast, indexed FTS of dovecot IMAP stores from within a MUA, is fts_solr even helpful? or is it targeted for web interfaces to search ... ?
You can add the break-imap-search option and it'll be helpful with
those MUAs that use IMAP SEARCH command (Thunderbird I think, but not
Apple Mail or Outlook).
hi,
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi> wrote:
It's just not possible, because it doesn't support substring searches. But then again, perhaps no one cares. It's not like gmail's search is IMAP compliant either.
if the goal is fast, indexed FTS of dovecot IMAP stores from within a MUA, is fts_solr even helpful? or is it targeted for web interfaces to search ... ?
You can add the break-imap-search option and it'll be helpful with those MUAs that use IMAP SEARCH command (Thunderbird I think, but not Apple Mail or Outlook).
Ok, clear. So, from a MUA perspective ... *IS* fts_solr faster/better/cheaper/whatever than fts_squat?
It _seems_ that squat is fast, _does_ substring searches, and _is_ under your control in dovecot. Life seems simpler, but just as functional, with "just squat".
I'm clearly missing or misunderstanding the "solr advantage" ...
On Oct 9, 2009, at 12:41 AM, PGNet Dev wrote:
if the goal is fast, indexed FTS of dovecot IMAP stores from
within a MUA, is fts_solr even helpful? or is it targeted for web
interfaces to search ... ?You can add the break-imap-search option and it'll be helpful with
those MUAs that use IMAP SEARCH command (Thunderbird I think, but not
Apple Mail or Outlook).Ok, clear. So, from a MUA perspective ... *IS* fts_solr faster/better/cheaper/whatever than fts_squat?
Depends on what type of search query the user used.
It _seems_ that squat is fast,
Is it? With my mails it seems to be pretty slow when updating the
index. I've been thinking of some way to redesign it because of that.
_does_ substring searches, and _is_ under your control in dovecot. Life seems simpler, but just as functional, with "just squat".
I'm clearly missing or misunderstanding the "solr advantage" ...
Squat also uses more disk space than Solr, I think.
Hi,
hi,
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi> wrote:
It's just not possible, because it doesn't support substring searches. But then again, perhaps no one cares. It's not like gmail's search is IMAP compliant either.
if the goal is fast, indexed FTS of dovecot IMAP stores from within a MUA, is fts_solr even helpful? or is it targeted for web interfaces to search ... ?
You can add the break-imap-search option and it'll be helpful with
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 21:41:36 -0700, PGNet Dev wrote: those
MUAs that use IMAP SEARCH command (Thunderbird I think, but not Apple Mail or Outlook).
Ok, clear. So, from a MUA perspective ... *IS* fts_solr faster/better/cheaper/whatever than fts_squat?
It _seems_ that squat is fast, _does_ substring searches, and _is_ under your control in dovecot. Life seems simpler, but just as functional, with "just squat".
I'm clearly missing or misunderstanding the "solr advantage" ...
Cross-referencing http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-September/042904.html
So when you have a huge amount of folders (like we do... there are users with >10000 folders), Solr could have a big advantage through the single index.
Patrick.
-- STAR Software (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. http://www.star-group.net/ Phone: +86 (21) 3462 7688 x 826 Fax: +86 (21) 3462 7779
PGP key: E883A005 https://stshacom1.star-china.net/keys/patrick_nagel.asc Fingerprint: E09A D65E 855F B334 E5C3 5386 EF23 20FC E883 A005
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Patrick Nagel <patrick.nagel@star-group.net> wrote:
Cross-referencing http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2009-September/042904.html
So when you have a huge amount of folders (like we do... there are users with >10000 folders), Solr could have a big advantage through the single index.
thanks for the reference. i clearly need to try both & see. looking, atm, for a comprehensivce list of MUAs that can search squat vs solr indexes.
if, in fact, solr's the better performance solution, i hope that the IMAP compliance might, somehow, get addressed -- either from the Dovecot side, the MUAs, or both.
On Oct 10, 2009, at 12:41 AM, PGNet Dev wrote:
if, in fact, solr's the better performance solution, i hope that the IMAP compliance might, somehow, get addressed -- either from the Dovecot side, the MUAs, or both.
The lack of IMAP compliance isn't really as serious as you seem to
think. Almost all MUAs work just fine with the lack of it. GMail's
IMAP search is also not IMAP compliant. Several other servers' search
is neither. Apparently there are some little used MUAs (or users) that
really want the substring searching to work, but I doubt you'll
actually find any such users.
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi> wrote:
The lack of IMAP compliance isn't really as serious as you seem to think.
that may well be the case ... i'm simply presuming, based on oft-made excuses @ MUA dev that "it's not in the IMAP spec blah blah blah" that it IS a peblem.
Almost all MUAs work just fine with the lack of it. GMail's IMAP search is also not IMAP compliant. Several other servers' search is neither. Apparently there are some little used MUAs (or users) that really want the substring searching to work, but I doubt you'll actually find any such users.
ok. i'll file this under wait-n-see. thanks.
participants (3)
-
Patrick Nagel
-
PGNet Dev
-
Timo Sirainen