3 ms·
Why did you offer lucene as a counterpoint, if you deny that there’s any equivalent implementation elsewhere that isn’t lucene? That just means lucene cannot be
by JetSetWilly 5y ago
Why did you offer lucene as a counterpoint, if you deny that there’s any equivalent implementation elsewhere that isn’t lucene? That just means lucene cannot be a counterpoint if it just so happens that the only implementation is in java.
- jillesvangurp 5y agoBecause people have been trying pretty hard to replicate what Lucene does in other languages specifically because they thought they could do a better job. The reason the Java implementation continues to dominate is that it being implemented in Java has repeatedly proven to be not as much of an issue as people assume it to be. At least not enough to matter. And since the article is called "why C is faster than Java" and the main argument is literally "here's this thing implemented in C that is fast", it's an excellent counterpoint to go "here's this other thing in Java that is fast".
- JetSetWilly 5y agoSure, I would agree that lucene is “fast enough”. But that doesn’t mean it couldn’t be faster if implemented in another language, and I believe that tantivy demonstrates that it could be. A historical accident isn’t a counterpoint.