5 ms·
Exact word queries are on our near-term todo list. We've already added support for exclusion via "-" operator in the last release. Dynamic synonyms will requir
by karterk 5y ago
Exact word queries are on our near-term todo list. We've already added support for exclusion via "-" operator in the last release.
Dynamic synonyms will require more thought given the machine learning aspects involved. May require domain specific models. And I also wonder how "off-the-shelf" it will really be in practice.
- freediver 5y agoThanks for the answer. Do you have benchmarks vs meiliesearch (indexing/retrieval speed, retrieval accuracy)? Are your SDKs (python) thread safe? Asking as current user of meilisearch which is a great product and I would give it 8/10 because of some quirks. Considering trying typesense. Thanks.
- jabo 5y agoFeature-wise, here's how Typesense compares to Meilisearch, Algolia and Elasticsearch: https://typesense.org/typesense-vs-algolia-vs-elasticsearch-vs-meilisearch/ https://typesense.org/typesense-vs-algolia-vs-elasticsearch-... I don't have comparative benchmarks, but here are some Typesense benchmarks: A dataset containing 2.2 Million recipes (recipe names and ingredients): - Took 3.6mins to index all 2.2M records - On a server with 4vCPUs, Typesense was able to handle a concurrency of 104 concurrent search queries per second, with an average search processing time of 11ms. A dataset containing 28 Million books (book titles, authors and categories): - Took 78mins to index all 28M records - On a server with 4vCPUs, Typesense was able to handle a concurrency of 46 concurrent search queries per second, with an average search processing time of 28ms. With a dataset containing 3 Million products (Amazon product data), Typesense was able to handle a throughput of 250 concurrent search queries per second on an 8-vCPU 3-node Highly Available Typesense cluster.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]