Re: lexemes in prefix search going through dictionary modifications

From: Sushant Sinha <sushant354(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: lexemes in prefix search going through dictionary modifications
Date: 2011-10-25 18:15:17
Message-ID: 1319566517.2023.24.camel@dragflick
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 19:27 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:

> Assume, for example, that the postgres mailing list archive search used
> tsearch (which I think it does, but I'm not sure). It'd then probably make
> sense to add "postgres" to the list of stopwords, because it's bound to
> appear in nearly every mail. But wouldn't you want searched which include
> 'postgres*' to turn up empty? Quite certainly not.

That improves recall for "postgres:*" query and certainly doesn't help
other queries like "post:*". But more importantly it affects precision
for all queries like "a:*", "an:*", "and:*", "s:*", 't:*', "the:*", etc
(When that is the only search it also affects recall as no row matches
an empty tsquery). Since stopwords are smaller, it means prefix search
for a few characters is meaningless. And I would argue that is when the
prefix search is more important -- only when you know a few characters.

-Sushant.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2011-10-25 18:48:05 Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)
Previous Message Erik Rijkers 2011-10-25 18:09:51 Re: (PATCH) Adding CORRESPONDING to Set Operations