<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /></head><body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Hey Karl,<br>
<br>
I don't think we're at a place where we want to promote Xapian as the default and recommended indexed search framework. We added support for it due to CLucene's lack of updates, but support is very preliminary and we haven't done any speed or size testing with it until your report! :) Maybe there are options to optimize the creation time and index size. Thanks for the report!<br>
<br>
Troy<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On November 27, 2014 8:59:29 AM PST, Karl Kleinpaste <karl@kleinpaste.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<font face="FreeSerif">I hadn't thought too much about the new
Xapian search usage until I had reason this morning to look at
disc usage under ~/.sword.<br />
<br />
Xapian indices are monstrous in size.<br />
<br />
A touchstone for this is that my personal NETnote module has
rawcom ot+nt files whose size total about 23M. But the Xapian
indices for the module are 140M. Until a little while ago,
~/.sword contained about 28G, of which 23.2G was Xapian
indices... Then I deleted all Xapian indices and am back to
CLucene using --without-xapian in Sword.<br />
<br />
I realize the reason for Xapian is CLucene's lack of support. But
do we really want a 7-fold size increase in module space
occupation for the sake of the new indexer/search?<br />
</font>
<p style="margin-top: 2.5em; margin-bottom: 1em; border-bottom: 1px solid #000"></p><pre class="k9mail"><hr /><br />sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org<br /><a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br />Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page</pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>