Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

elasticsearch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#131

Post by rpedela »

bilbo0s wrote: post #126
rjzzleep wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to be fair, the main selling point of mongodb is that developers can access it more easily. i haven't really touched mongodb in over a year and then only for playing, but have you tried the elasticsearch filter query syntax? have you compared mongodbs syntax? also, i have the exact opposite nitpick. people want to use it to do everything, mail indexers, file system indexers. what's the matter with web developer folks…

"....why is it that when the next database comes around they want to use it for everything?...." Because they like a simple web stack. KISS means a faster time to market. Faster time to iterate. Faster time to fix bugs because there are fewer places those bugs can be. All of that doesn't even factor in the productivity benefits gained by not having to switch technologies from project to project. But to be fair, ES is…

Apache Lucene has been around awhile. ES has been around since 2010.

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#132

Post by bilbo0s »

rpedela wrote: post #131
bilbo0s wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"....why is it that when the next database comes around they want to use it for everything?...." Because they like a simple web stack. KISS means a faster time to market. Faster time to iterate. Faster time to fix bugs because there are fewer places those bugs can be. All of that doesn't even factor in the productivity benefits gained by not having to switch technologies from project to project. But to be fair, ES is…

Apache Lucene has been around awhile. ES has been around since 2010.

Yeah...

that's a pretty long time.

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#134

Post by rpedela »

camus2 wrote: post #26
kainosnoema wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised so many people miss this. Out of the box, Elasticsearch is a distributed NoSQL store with better write consistency (and arguably performance) than MongoDB offers in its default configuration. The major missing feature was backup snapshots and restores, which 1.0 delivers—along with aggregations that more than rival MongoDBs. The team has intentionally avoided marketing themselves as a NoSQL store (was t…

did not know all that stuff, could Elasticsearch be the holy grail of document stores ?

We'll maybe some day but it is still too easy to corrupt the data or index. Recently I had a problem where the data itself was fine and searches worked correctly but it was 100x slower than it should be. It just started happening for no apparent reason and I just do basic searches on typical data. I still don't know what happened but creating a new index fixed the problem.

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#135

Post by darkarmani »

acdha wrote: post #47
dc2447 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elasticsearch mostly "just works", and we didn't have to worry about complex schema definitions, working with giant complex XML files (hello Solr) If you were using Solr there are a few operational modes to run in. Config file based or SolrCloud[0]. The latter is more akin the ES in terms of cluster management. I agree though from an simplicity of deployment perspective at scale ES is has a much lighter learning cu…

SolrCloud is nothing like ES in terms of management: you end up running a separate zookeeper service with even more files which all have to be configured correctly just to get it running and you have to micromanage shard allocation to ensure that you can add nodes in the future but also not have it intentionally deadlock when a server fails and you no longer have enough nodes for a quorum. All of this happens with th…

I lost count of the +1s. That issue must have around +180. :)

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#136

Post by Argorak »

shurane wrote: post #128
Argorak wrote: post #43

Beyond the technology, Elasticsearch has a very mature, active and helpful community with users groups all over the world. We're well connected. Pick your favourite users group here: http://elasticsearch.meetup.com/ Full disclosure: I started and run the Berlin UG. We set ourselves apart by always providing a small introduction into ES for those that are completely new and would have a hard time following the main ta…

Intros to ES and other technologies are useful. I don't see many tutorials covering usage of ES here: http://www.elasticsearch.org/tutorials/ Could you maybe provide a link to yours?

The introduction is in person, at the users group.

Yep, tutorials is a huge problem, but there are people working on that.

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#137

Post by malaporte »

swah wrote: post #17
karterk wrote: post #13

Elasticsearch mostly "just works". The latest version of Solr has made clustering easier (requires managing Zookeeper), but before that, it was either ES or nightmare. Lucene is one of those projects which hardly has any real competition. That's surprising given how many real world software projects have a search requirement. While Lucene is excellent, it's not without flaws and competition is always great.

Hmm, could that be because they have to compete with free?

Lucene does have competition, mostly in the commercial world. I know, since I work for one of those companies :p

Solr, ElasticSearch, etc. are mostly concerned about the index/search features, and they do quite a good job there. But this still leaves a huge amount of space for commercial offerings, as core search is only a part of the problem. I'm thinking about connectivity with complex enterprise systems, support for the specific security models of those systems, integration in other systems, etc. Believe me, those problems are not easy to solve.

So, even if we have an index that can most probably match Lucene's feature for feature and quite a lot of things beside, we typically won't go after deals where simple search is the only requirement. Instead we focus on larger deals with more complex requirements. And we're doing quite well, thank you :)

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#138

Post by kainosnoema »

room271 wrote: post #55
camus2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did not know all that stuff, could Elasticsearch be the holy grail of document stores ?

No. The choice of datastore is still incredibly complicated in the distributed world; it's all about tradeoffs really. For example, Elasticsearch has poor availability characteristics - both because it is master-slave and because it focuses on ensuring consistency - relative to, for example, something like Riak.

I don't believe it's "master-slave" in the way you're thinking. Elasticsearch shards its indexes among all available nodes, storing replicas of each shard on separate nodes when possible. This ensures that the entire cluster is available as long as at least one replica of a shard is still online. In fact, if configured properly, it has better availability than consistency since by default it only flushes its oplog to the Lucene index segments every second (though writes aren't considered committed until they reach a quorum of nodes, so consistency is fairly good in practice as well).

Re: Elasticsearch 1.0.0 released

#139

Post by scorpion032 »

alisson wrote: post #44
axefrog wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What limitations should one be aware of that would make ElasticSearch not a viable candidate where something like MongoDB would be a better fit?

On ElasticSearch you have to update the whole document, no commands to manipulate them. You don't have commands like: $set, $addToSet, $pop, etc.. You need to have a good understanding of how tokenizers and analyzers work to be able to create good results for your data. I have difficulties matching documents with the exact title being searched for. On MongoDB that just works, on ElasticSearch you need to configure it…

If for storage of data, I'd use and only use a RDBMS like Postgres. Not Mongo.
Post reply on HN