Google Search Appliance 与 Microsoft Enterprise Search (FAST)
我是 .NET 开发人员，一直与各种搜索提供商合作，但 Google Search Appliance/Mini 始终最适合实施企业级搜索时的要求。我还没有参与过 Microsoft Enterprise Search，因此我想听听开发人员的经验。
这些天我收到了很多来自 Microsoft 的企业搜索销售宣传，告诉我 FAST 真的很棒。 Microsoft 是否有 Google Mini（更便宜、有限的 API）和 Google Search Appliance（具有 API 的昂贵企业）等产品？
如果我们抛开所有销售言论，并排比较这两种产品，那么与 Google Enterprise 解决方案相比，对于开发人员和 Microsoft Enterprise Search 来说，它们有哪些优势？
更新： 我正在搜索有关此主题的更多信息，看来 FAST 确实更多地关注非结构化数据，而 Google Appliance 更适合搜索网页/内联网页面。这是真的吗？
I am .NET developer and I have been working with various search providers but Google Search Appliance/Mini has been always the best fit for requirements when implementing enterprise level search. I have not worked yet on Microsoft Enterprise Search so I would like to hear developers experiences on it.
These days I am getting a lot Enterprise Search sales propaganda from Microsoft telling me that FAST is really great. Does Microsoft have products like Google Mini (cheaper, limited API) and Google Search Appliance (expensive enterprise with API)?
If we take all sales talk out of it and just look these two products side-by-side what are advantages for developers and on Microsoft Enterprise Search when comparing to Google Enterprise solution?
Update:
I was searching some more info in this subject and it seems that FAST is really focusing more on unstructured data where Google Appliance is more for searching web/intranet pages. Is this true?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
比较两者有点不公平，因为他们细分了不同类型的用户。
GSA (Google) 的目标客户是希望获得简单体验来为其 Web 和数据库托管内容建立索引的公司。只要数据可以以 Google feed 的形式公开，就可以对其他系统建立索引。因此，一旦数据采用 Google 理解的格式，它就会应用 Google 技术来确定如何最好地索引该文档。
FAST 则处于另一端。它适用于所有相同类型的数据源（结构化 - DBA 和非结构化 - Web/文档）。然而，FAST 允许您对如何处理数据并将其插入索引进行细粒度控制。
因此，如果您需要控制索引过程，那么快速是您的朋友。它允许您定义字段、将属性映射到这些字段，然后为您提供强大的查询 API（通过 HTTP）来搜索该内容。
由于 FAST 划分索引的方式，它还提供了一种极具可扩展性的产品。 Google 不提供这种级别的控制，因为它是一个“黑匣子”（实际上是黄匣子；））。
Google 和 FAST 之间的查询 API 非常相似。它们都使用 HTTP 来构造查询并返回结果。
我的建议是，如果您对 Google 体验感到满意，请继续使用它。如果您不满意并且确实想要控制处理工作流程或需要扩大规模，那么请选择 FAST。
It is a bit unfair to compare the two since they are segmenting different types of users.
GSA (Google) is targted to companies that want a simple experiance for indexing their web and database hosted content. It is possible to index other systems as long as the data can be exposed in the form of a Google feed. So once the data is in a format that Google understands, it applies the Google technology to determine how best to index that document.
FAST is at the other end of the spectrum. It works with all the same types of data sources (structured - DBA and unstructured - Web/Documents). However FAST allows you to have fine grained control on how the data is processed and inserted into the Index.
So if you need to control the indexing process FAST is your friend. It allows you to define fields, map properties into these fields and then gives you a powerful query API (via HTTP) to search that content.
FAST also provides an extremely scalable product because of the way it divides the index up. Google does not provide this level of control because it is a "black box" (actually Yellow Box ;) ).
The Query API is very similar between Google and FAST. They both use HTTP to craft the query and return the result.
My advice if you are happy with the Google experiance then stay with it. If you are not happy and really want to control the processing workflow or need to scale up then go with FAST.