Apache Lucene vs. Azure AI Search

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Lucene
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Apache Lucene is an open source and free text search engine library written in Java. It is a technology suitable for applications that requires full-text search, and is available cross-platform.N/A
Azure AI Search
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
Azure AI Search (formerly Azure Cognitive Search) is enterprise search as a service, from Microsoft.
$0.10
Per Hour
Pricing
Apache LuceneAzure AI Search
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic
$0.101
Per Hour
Standard S1
$0.336
Per Hour
Standard S2
$1.344
Per Hour
Standard S3
$2.688
Per Hour
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache LuceneAzure AI Search
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsA free and open source product.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache LuceneAzure AI Search
User Ratings
Apache LuceneAzure AI Search
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache LuceneAzure AI Search
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache Lucene offers great full-text search library that makes it easy to add search functionality to a website or other applications. Lucene is ideal if you want low-level access to the indexes and its APIs. For general purposes, Apache Solr, the web application built atop of Lucene can be used instead. Apache Solr comes with caching, HTTP/ JSON APIs and a simple web administration console.
Read full review
If you have a medium amount of data (2GB - 2.4TB), high-security concerns, and search is a key requirement in your single-tenant application then Azure Search likely has you covered. If you have a small amount of data per tenant (EG, about 2GB), have low-security concerns, and a multi-tenant application where search is a key requirement, then Azure Search would likely be a good choice - though you would need to implement your own concept of sharding and managing across potentially multiple Azure Search instances. If you can reflect your would-be indexes in Azure Search by depositing the data in columns in a SQL table and just index it for full-text search - and that still fits your requirements - it's probably better to start with SQL Database then scale up to Azure Search when you need the advanced features like ranking or cognitive abilities.
Read full review
Pros
  • Fast indexing, with proper optimization I can index a Gig of data in 2 mins.
  • Easy integration with web crawlers
  • Quick and Accurate Results
  • Flexible sorting option for results based on the search field and relevance
Read full review
  • Incredibly robust back-end infrastructure.
  • Streamlined integration into Microsoft's Azure Cloud.
  • From a user standpoint, it lets the customer easily access their data and provide useful search tips.
Read full review
Cons
  • We had difficulty porting the project to a cluster based environment on the cloud.
  • For our particular use case of retrieving documents based on text pattern matching, the program worked efficiently however, we did not find many resources for image pattern recognition based on their metadata.
Read full review
  • Like virtually all Azure services, it has first-class treatment for .Net as the developer platform of choice, but largely ignores other options. While there is a first-party Python SDK, there are only community packages for other languages like Ruby and Node. Might be a game of roulette for those to be kept up-to-date. This might make it a non-starter for some teams that don't want to do the work to integrate with the REST API directly.
  • In my opinion, partitions inside of Azure Search don't count as data segregation for customers in a multi-tenant app, so any application where you have many customers with high-security concerns, Azure Search is probably a non-starter.
  • To elaborate on the multi-tenant issue: Azure Search's approach to pricing is pretty steep. While there is a free tier for small applications (50MB of content or less) the first paid tier is about 14x more expensive than the first SQL Database tier that supports full-text search. For many applications, it makes a lot more economic sense to just run some LIKE or CONTAINS queries on columns in a table rather than going with Azure Search.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
The search and index performance of [Apache] Lucene is excellent and the quality of results is good, if not better. For implementing it with small scale applications it is a no brainer, Lucene is the best and most cost effective solution. Learning curve is not too steep either.
Read full review
Azure Search is a competitor against Google's own AI autosuggest a feature. We went with Azure because our network security folks found it to be more robust from a security standpoint, which is incredibly important when you have proprietary manufacturing information. Additionally, we're a Microsoft shop so it plugged into our cloud hosting package and client facing OS.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Very good at using minimal hardware sets saving money on hosting.
  • Very good at housing multiple cores or instances.
Read full review
  • Service cannot be downgrade or upgrade after creation
  • Good tool provide maximum ROI
Read full review
ScreenShots

Apache Lucene Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of