Comments on: The Federal Documentum User’s Group, November 2007

By: Hartmut Clausen

Hartmut Clausen — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:09:50 +0000

The problem with FAST and Documentum is not the complexity, but the lack of documentation.

By: Alexandra Larsson

Alexandra Larsson — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:32:25 +0000

Ok, well when I was at EMC World in Orlando this year quite a few people seem to have different kind of issues with the full-text index server (FAST). Still, Documentum is probably one of the more complex ECM-system out there so I am a bit surprised that a complex search engine scare people away. I recently have some experience of using and configuring FAST ESP and I really appreciate all the possibilities it offers to create a very good search application even if that means a complex setup. The same goes for Documentum. If I needed an easier to use lightweight document manager I would choose something else.

By: Pie

Pie — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:08:17 +0000

FAST may be more capable, but it is also complex and takes more overhead than they had originally planned. I’ve used Lucene and it works well. I’m hoping that the switch will allow better flexibility to configure full-text for each environment.

I’m not making the jump to Lucene quickly. I’m going to upgrade the InStream engine and if that is doing well, I won’t be too quick to rock the boat on any existing installations.

By: Alexandra Larsson

Alexandra Larsson — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:20:46 +0000

Interesting to learn about Lucene as the search engine. I guess it is a matter of money but isn’t FAST InStream a much more capable search engine? The sad part now is that very few of the cool features of the big brother FAST ESP is exposed in WebTop/DAM.