<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Homo-Adminus Blog - Latest Comments in Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://homo-adminus.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:34:12 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-5715639</link><description>Thanks for the info. May God have mercy on us all.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bulid8701056</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:34:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460894</link><description>Yes I agree sphinx makes for a great general purpose index. We put a huge database in sphinx for full text, but realised it could be used an index on many of the other fields too!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;@Pavel &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Sphinx can search multiple indexes in one query, so the basic idea is to create a main index, and the a delta index, you just more regually reindex the delta index. You can even have multiple delta indexes - basically constantly reindexing the changes. You can also use line attribute updates to 'delete' items from the main index without reindexing.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Barry Hunter</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:45:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460895</link><description>Andrew has said that online add and remove is coming in 0.9.9.  When will it be ready?  Don't know.  But that will be a big, big jump in usefulness.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Moon</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:55:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460897</link><description>Hello Alexei,&lt;br&gt;I have one comment regarding this:&lt;br&gt;From what I've read so far Sphynx is great only for non-constantly-changing-data... Am I correct.&lt;br&gt;If you have thousands of writes per second and you want the info to be available within 1-3 second span how would you do that with sphynx??? if reindexing takes 20-40 seconds of 3Mil rows as you said...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Pavel</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:13:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460896</link><description>Hi!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;First of all, you blog is very interesting and I like it, salute from Ireland to you! ;)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The problem is with MySQL(like with every DBMS written by folks wo/ corporate experience) still the relative small amount of features to handle something bigger than the average. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Let me show you what i am thinking about:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/db2/library/techarticle/dm-0605ahuja2/index.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/db2/library/t...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/oracle9i/datasheets/partitioning.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/oracl...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms345146.aspx" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms34514...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And just for the record, innodb is an Oracle product.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Maybe you can try this:&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/partitioning-limitations.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/partitio...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Regards,&lt;br&gt;lix</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lix</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:42:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460893</link><description>2W. Andrew Loe III: No, for browse index we use documents' attributes only.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Scoundrel</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:05:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460889</link><description>Do you guys use Sphinx to index the contents of your documents, or only metadata about them that is stored in the database?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">W. Andrew Loe III</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:46:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460891</link><description>Good блог at you, cognitive:)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Карл</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:27:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460890</link><description>Brian,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There are two different techniques - one is adding pseudo keywords and other is using filters and "Full Table Scan" query.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Pseudo keywords works if there are few of them in the query and they are well selective.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If you will have 10 keywords each with 90% selectivity this would not work well.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Filters w full table scan however can be slower with good selectivity but you can have a lot of non selective filters with very low penalty.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also note Sphinx "full table scan" has optimizations so it often can skip a lot of "blocks" based on filters which makes it kind of similar to indexed lookup</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Peter Zaitsev</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 21:02:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Using Sphinx for Non-Fulltext Queries</title><link>http://blog.kovyrin.net/2008/05/19/using-sphinx-for-non-fulltext-queries/#comment-2460892</link><description>We use this technique for filtering searches on categories, price, etc.  We just stick cat_39 in a deal and add that to the sphinx query.  Works like a charm.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Moon</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 12:52:27 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>