| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: search.postgresql.org |
| Date: | 2006-03-25 06:24:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20060325022318.Y4637@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> I was looking at our search configuration and I noted that out of a
>> weight of 100 we are only weighing archives at 50 and varlena at 25.
>> That seems a little low as archives is the primary source of pratical
>> and real world issues and varlena is a great resource.
>
> Um, what other resources are rated higher? If you'll pardon my
> ignorance, what other resources is the search engine considering at all?
And maybe a short explanation of what these 'weights' are all about? Does
that just mean that when i search for something, archives results will
always preceed varlena's? And, if so, and we are only doing archives vs
varlena, as long as archives is weighted higher then varlena, does it
matter what the weights are? Could be 1 + 2, no?
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Hansen | 2006-03-25 06:45:28 | Re: search.postgresql.org |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-25 06:07:55 | Re: search.postgresql.org |