From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch, teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |
Date: | 2007-02-22 17:50:24 |
Message-ID: | 45DDD7E0.8030509@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> > And users are constantly complaining that PostgreSQL doesn't have
>> > fulltext indexing capabilities (if they don't know about tsearch2) or
>> > about how hard it is to use tsearch2.
>> >
>> >> SELECT create_fulltext_mapping(cfgname, ARRAY['lex..','..'],
>> >> ARRAY['...']) is readable.
>> >
>> > Hardly. Because it's not like SQL:
>>
>> I have to agree here.
>>
>> SELECT create_fulltext_mapping(cfgname, ARRAY['lex..','..'],
>> ARRAY['...']) is readable.
>>
>> Is a total no op. We might as well just leave it in contrib.
>>
>
> I am for integration tsearch to core, why not. But I don't see reason
> for special syntax. Stored procedures is exactly good tool for it.
I am not talking about stored procedures. I am talking about a very
ugly, counter intuitive syntax above.
Initializing full text should be as simple as:
CREATE INDEX foo USING FULLTEXT(bar);
(or something similar)
Or:
CREATE TABLE foo (id serial, names text FULLTEXT);
Anything more complicated is a waste of cycles.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-02-22 17:53:07 | Re: SCMS question |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-02-22 17:49:53 | Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question |