Re: Let's play bash the search engine

Reece Hart wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 15:47 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Take a look at let us know what you think and how it performs for you.
>
>
> Terrific. Fast and meaningful.
>
> I echo Thomas' request to have docs limited to a version (or, better,
> most recent). Perhaps archived docs should be searched via a separate
> page entirely.

+1 there - current docs should be searched unless you specify all/older
docs. Maybe old docs can be included in the archives section, which the
link isn't overly clear that it is the mail archives.

> Most the queries I did hit what I expected, except that the docs were
> for old versions. (In fact, I don't think 8.2 docs ever showed up
> first.)
>
> I tried "defer constraints" and got a few not-too-useful hits. However,
> "deferred constraints" returned meaningful links. Is that a stemmer
> problem?
>
> -Reece
>
I reckon the old search showed 3-4 lines in the 'preview' of the
listing, now we only get 1 which sometimes wraps partially onto 2.
Personally I preferred having 3-4 lines in the results - it can be
easier to pick out the page that you are searching for without going there.

One thing that I have seen on a few searches (eg. yahoo cached pages) is
when you follow a link it then highlights the search criteria on the
page. Would be a nice feature to quickly find the search result on the
destination page.

I found a little error in the page coding calculations -

Search for create
it states "Pages 1-20 of more than 1000." - that's ok
if you go to page 50 you get "Pages 981-1000 of more than 1000." - fine
then on page 51 you get "Your search for create returned no hits."

search for 'select' or 'update' gets the same thing. It would seem that
you have a 'limit 1000' which gives the 'more than 1000' in the hits
description but it generates an extra page (51) that tries to fetch
1001-1020

--

Shane Ambler
pgSQL(at)007Marketing(dot)com

Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz