MSE Search gone? [Merged]

dc2447

jamesd wrote:

If the load is database side, adding a replication slave and directing search to that is one possible approach. Longer term, using the sphinx storage engine, designed for and dedicated to search, is likely to be the best way. Much lower load than MyISAM fulltext search. That's OK for a while but ultimately it gets outgrown if a site continues to grow.

Replication won't help here - vb isn't smart enough to have a second connection string for searches only.

Clustering is the answer - upgrade to the latest mysql 5.1 and scale horizontally

That or disable guest searches

sra

I'd like to see a permanent search box that uses a search engine (e.g. a google box) at the bottom of the Advanced Search for the times when the crappy vBulletin search doesn't return good results.

It would be useful to have a search page that uses google/yahoo set up for if this is ever necessary again - then a search link could point to that temporarily.

Here's one I made with Rollyo to test it out a while back, but there are a few other services out there:

MSE Search (Uses Yahoo Search)

But it's far from an ideal situation since it relies on the last crawl by the search engine and isn't up to date, sorted by board, or in chronological order.

One thing's for certain - leaving without any search is not good

James240

easy peeps it will all be fixed before we know it

Mo'_Money

And again in English please...whateva

jamesd wrote:

If the load is database side, adding a replication slave and directing search to that is one possible approach. Longer term, using the sphinx storage engine, designed for and dedicated to search, is likely to be the best way. Much lower load than MyISAM fulltext search. That's OK for a while but ultimately it gets outgrown if a site continues to grow.

jamesd

dc2447 wrote:

Replication won't help here - vb isn't smart enough to have a second connection string for searches only.

That's unfortunate, since its usually the best initial way to scale with MySQL. Horizontal segmentation so parts of the board are served from different servers is another option. Or splitting the boards to a different server if they currently share one.

dc2447 wrote:

Clustering is the answer - upgrade to the latest mysql 5.1 and scale horizontally

This seems unlikely, if only because it's not likely to be out of beta until the end of the second quarter of 2007. Running MSE on it while it is beta is something I recommend against.

What do you mean by "Clustering" in this context? Does this board system support the use of the MySQL Cluster storage engine, with its limitations on field types and current limitation that all data must be in RAM, being removed in 5.1? Or did you mean some other type of cluster - perhaps different parts of the board on different servers?

dc2447 wrote:

That or disable guest searches

Not a bad idea at high load periods.

Sra, google works... I've had to use it myself at a place once it got above Alexa rank 1000 or so. Short-term solution but it beat nothing...

Mo'_Money wrote:

And again in English please...whateva

Sorry, tech talk - only those who know the technology will understand. It'll take more time than is useful to explain it and it's really not so interesting unless you're deeply involved in the technical aspects of running popular web sites.

dc2447

What do you mean by "Clustering" in this context? Does this board system support the use of the MySQL Cluster storage engine, with its limitations on field types and current limitation that all data must be in RAM, being removed in 5.1?

That is exactly what I mean. 5.1 is the daddy - you do proper clustering without the restrictions you mentioned above.

jamesd

Cluster in 5.1 does promise to be fairly nice but it's still not suitable for everything. It's probably unsuitable for the sort of use seen here, particularly search. Works much better for high rates of single record queries and limited record counts in joins. Should do better with (where) condition pushdown fully in place, though perhaps still not well enough. For Cluster think more in terms of telecoms (used by Nokia and others) and more limited use for things like session storage. It can do other things, but those are where it tends to do best at the moment.

People trying to use Cluster as a general purpose storage engine are prone to running into trouble they could avoid with something like InnoDB.

For most people, the addition of partitioning support in 5.1 is a bigger deal.

jellyhead

search is back

skim

Surely clicking NEW POSTS generates less traffic than people continually clicking all the way through each separate section of the forum?

dc2447

jamesd wrote:

Cluster in 5.1 does promise to be fairly nice but it's still not suitable for everything. It's probably unsuitable for the sort of use seen here, particularly search. Works much better for high rates of single record queries and limited record counts in joins. Should do better with (where) condition pushdown fully in place, though perhaps still not well enough. For Cluster think more in terms of telecoms (used by Nokia and others) and more limited use for things like session storage. It can do other things, but those are where it tends to do best at the moment.

People trying to use Cluster as a general purpose storage engine are prone to running into trouble they could avoid with something like InnoDB.

For most people, the addition of partitioning support in 5.1 is a bigger deal.

Well I don't agree. I think vbulletin's of this size are ideally suited to Mysql Cluster 5.1