Which is better in umbraco elasticsearch or lucene - elasticsearch

I understand that generally speaking Elastic search is better to use in most cases but i would like to know specifically for Umbraco, whether it is as good to use or not? Or if lucene is better

I've not use elastic search before, but I use Umbraco a lot and I use lucene, mainly via Examine which uses lucene.
Read about Examine here https://our.umbraco.org/documentation/reference/searching/examine/
See an example of some advanced search I set up in Umbraco using Examine here
http://www.codeshare.co.uk/blog/how-to-search-by-document-type-and-property-in-umbraco/

Related

Local indexing of rich text files

I am trying to create a local index for my notes which comprises mainly of markdown files, text files, codes in python, javascript and dart.
I came across Solr and Elasticsearch.
But the main differences are focused around online use and distributedness.
Which can be a better choice if i need a good integrarion with javascript through electronjs?
Keeping in mind that the files are on local storage and there is not much focus on distributedness but on integration with javascript frontend and efficiency on local system.
Elasticsearch is more popular among newer developers due to its ease of use. But if you are already used to working with Solr, stay with it because there is no specific advantage of migrating to Elasticsearch.
I believe for your use case either of them would work.
However, If you need it to handle analytical queries in addition to searching text, Elasticsearch is the better choice
In terms of popularity, a larger community, documentations I would say elasticsearch is the winner, You can look at the below google trends
You can use the solr along with Apache Tika.
Apache Tika help in extracting the content/Text of different file system.
Using the above the you can index the metadata of the files and content of the files to the Apache solr.
You get admin tool for the analysis of the index and the fields to determine if you able to achieve the desired result.

Full text search in Neo4j vs Elasticsearch

Both Neo4j 4.0 and elasticsearch have full text seach and inverted index with apache lucene.
So how elastic search is better than neo4j full text search?
Consider that we are dealing with the knowledge graph as a data storage model developed in Neo4j.
Apart from that why should we use elasticsearch with Neo4j 4.0. what are things that elasticsearch offer but not neo4j 4.0
So how elastic search is better than neo4j full text search?
"Better" is largely dependent on your use case. But the tools (Neo4j and ElasticSearch) were built for drastically different purposes.
Neo4j is best when used as a graph-traversal engine, returning data from edge (relationship) based queries. It might have similar capabilities, but it just wasn't meant to be used as a search engine.
Want things like "fuzzy" matching and relevance ranking? Neo4j is not going to do any of that. Also, ElasticSearch is a true out-of-the-box distributed datastore. Neo4j can't distribute without an enterprise license.
Basically, it comes down to business requirements. If a datastore mainly needs to execute graph traversals, and serve some simple search-like requests, Neo4j might be enough on its own. Need a full-featured search engine to serve that same data? ElasticSearch is the better suited to handle that.

Orchard Core Built in search versus Azure Search

I am new to CMS search abilities and Azure search. I am looking at CMS options and was looking at Orchard Core CMS and saw it had Lucene search and GraphQL for searching via Headless CMS implementation as well. I also see Azure search services out in Azure. I am confused on if I should simply use the built-in search Orchard Core CMS already has or if Azure search is much better and what it can offer me. Clueless here....
Orchard Core as of now uses Lucene directly. The only drawback of using Lucene directly is that it doesn't scale as well as an Azure Search for example which is a distributed service.
The Lucene implementation in OC has been inspired by ElasticSearch. You can create Lucene Queries which are using quite the same syntax as ElasticSearch Queries. In fact we try to use the ElasticSearch documentation to replicate as much as we can the same Query syntax.
Right now the plan is to eventually support Reddis + ElasticSearch as distributed services but I've heard nothing about Azure Search. Remember that ElasticSearch is probably a little more polyvalent as it can also be installed on premise.

Plugging elastic search to my ibm cloudant app

I have an app on cloudant :
How can i plug an elastic search online version, for making full text queries ?
I want to use the river plug in because the new one is too complex .
For now, the only way for me is to do it on localhost, and install elastic 1.6 on localhost, but i'd like to be able to make queries directly online.
Maybe I should use a LUCENT javascript library for couchDb instead ?
Thank you.
What is the problem you're solving here? Cloudant has sophisticated built-in full-text indexing capabilities on top of Lucene:
https://console.bluemix.net/docs/services/Cloudant/api/search.html#search
Whilst it's possible to hook ES onto the Cloudant changes feed, it seems like an overly complex solution that gains little advantage compared with Cloudant's built-in Lucene.

using CKAN with Elasticsearch to index data , possible?

I'm trying to use an open data portal which is CKAN . However its search platform uses solr , but i want to use elasticsearch to index my data . Is this a way to use elasticsearch with CKAN ?
Thanks.
The short answer is no.
ES is probably more popular now, but I can't think of any really good reason to switch from SOLR. They are both just wrappers around Lucene. Please do say what your reasoning is.
It's certainly doable, since the coupling with SOLR is reasonably loose. There was some work towards this here: https://github.com/ckan/ckan/pull/3118 which no doubt you'd be welcome to help resource.

Resources