Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4887: inclusion operator (@>) on tsqeries behaves not conforming to documentation

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexey Bashtanov <bashtanov(at)imap(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4887: inclusion operator (@>) on tsqeries behaves not conforming to documentation
Date: 2010-04-20 16:27:03
Message-ID: 201004201627.o3KGR3003252@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Oleg, Teodor, would you look at this? ?I see the same behavior in 9.0.
>
> As there has been no movement on this I think we should punt this from:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items
>
> to
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo

Agreed, though I am disappointed because I thought Oleg and Teodor were
going to look at this bug.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> ...Robert
>
> > Alexey Bashtanov wrote:
> >>
> >> The following bug has been logged online:
> >>
> >> Bug reference: ? ? ?4887
> >> Logged by: ? ? ? ? ?Alexey Bashtanov
> >> Email address: ? ? ?bashtanov(at)imap(dot)cc
> >> PostgreSQL version: 8.3.1, 8.3.7
> >> Operating system: ? Linux 2.6.20 FC5 i686, Linux 2.6.27 FC10 i686
> >> Description: ? ? ? ?inclusion operator (@>) on tsqeries behaves not
> >> conforming to documentation
> >> Details:
> >>
> >> Hello!
> >>
> >> '!a|b'::tsquery <@ 'a|b'::tsquery evaluates to false, but should evalueate
> >> to true
> >> (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/functions-textsearch.html
> >> says "The tsquery containment operators consider only the lexemes listed in
> >> the two queries, ignoring the combining operators.")
> >>
> >> I think negation operator is treated as a lexeme. So please correct the
> >> behaviour of operators or rewrite this line of docs.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> ?Alexey
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> >> To make changes to your subscription:
> >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
> >
> > --
> > ?Bruce Momjian ?<bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> ? ? ? ?http://momjian.us
> > ?EnterpriseDB ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? http://enterprisedb.com
> > ?PG East: ?http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
> > ?+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> >
> > --
> > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> > To make changes to your subscription:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
> >

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-04-20 16:33:26 Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4887: inclusion operator (@>) on tsqeries behaves not conforming to documentation
Previous Message Geoffrey Pitman 2010-04-20 16:03:21 Re: query related to pgsql

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-04-20 16:30:48 Re: should I post the patch as committed?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2010-04-20 16:24:21 Re: perltidy