eGrove Systems provides "SOLR" - An Apache Product which contains a full text search server based on Lucene Visit our Website : www.egrovesys.com

1. SOLR
777 Washington Road #5
Parlin, NJ 08859
Phone: 732 307 2655
Email: sathish@egrovesys.com
- An Apache Product

2. CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
FEATURES
FUNCTIONS
ARCHITECTURE
PERFORMANCE
PROs & CONs
FUTURE TRENDS
WEBSITES USING SOLR
2

3. INTRODUCTION

4. INTRODUCTION
• A full text search server based on Lucene
• XML/HTTP Interfaces
• Loose Schema to define types and fields
• Web Administration Interface
• Extensive Caching
• Index Replication
• Extensible Open Architecture
• Written in Java5, deployable as a WAR
4

5. 5
INTRODUCTION

6. FEATURES

7. • Advanced full – text search.
• Optimized for high traffic volume.
• Standards based open interfaces – XML, JSON & HTTP
• Comprehensive administration interfaces
• Near real – time indexing
• Extensible plugin architecture
• Multiple search indices
• Apache UIMA
• Rich document parsing
• Advanced storage options
• Performance optimization
FEATURES
7

8. FUNCTIONS

9. • XML/HTTP and JSON APIs
• Hit highlighting
• Faceted Search and Filtering
• Geospatial Search
• Fast Incremental Updates and Index Replication
• Caching
• Replication
• Web administration interface
FUNCTIONS
9

10. ARCHITECTURE

11. ARCHITECTURE
Source : www.xaviermorera.com
11

12. PERFORMANCE

13. Performance Factors
• Schema design
• # of indexed fields
• omitNorms
• Term – vectors
• Docvalues
• Configuration
• mergeFactor
• Caches
• Indexing
• Bulk updates
• Commit Strategy
• Optimize
• Querying
PERFORMANCE
14

14. 1. Memory Testing – SOLR response time for 1 million volume index
with 8 GB and 32 GB instance.
Source : www.hathitrust.org
PERFORMANCE
15

15. 2. SOLR index size analysis for Twitter dataset
Source : www.dzone.com
PERFORMANCE
16

16. PROs & CONs

17. PROS CONS
 Easymonitoring.
 HighlyScalable.
 FaultTolerant.
 Flexibleandadaptablewith
easyconfiguration.
 PerformanceOptimization.
 HighlyConfigurableand
userextensiblecaching.
 Freelyavailable.
 Multilingualsupport.
 Easyimplementationandsetup
 Lessresourceutilization
 Agenerallackofcommitment
towardsSOLR.
 LessattentionsonJVM
settings&garbage.
 Increasedlatency.
 OccasionallargeIOloadto
replicatelargemerges.
 Complicatedloadbalanceand
management.
 Reconfigurationifthemaster
islost.
PROs & CONs
18

18. FUTURE TRENDS

19. • OOTB Simple Faceted Browsing
• Automatic Database Indexing
• Federated Search
– HA with failover
• Alternate output formats (JSON, Ruby)
• Highlighter integration
• Spellchecker
• Alternate APIs (Google Data, OpenSearch)
FUTURE TRENDS
20

20. WEBSITES
USING SOLR

21. • Whitehouse.gov
• Buy.com
• Cnet
• Netflix
• Apple
• Disney
• eTrade
• NASA
• MTV
• Zappos
• AOL
• Digg
WEBSITES USING SOLR
22