Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Jean-Pierre Pelletier <jppelletier(at)e-djuster(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?
Date: 2016-06-28 06:32:52
Message-ID: 20160628063252.GA1357314@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:22:26PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:08:54AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > > > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Teodor,
> > > > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> > > > > > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> > > > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> > > > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
> > > > > > message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
> > > > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> > > > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1. Consequently, I will appreciate your
> > > > > > efforts toward speedy resolution. Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > > >
> > > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
> > > > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
> > > > > update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > >
> > > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED. This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due
> > > >for your status update. Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
> > > >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately. If I do not hear from you by
> > > >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
> > > >ownership without further notice.
> > > >
> > > >[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com
> > >
> > > I'm working on it right now.
> >
> > That is good news, but it is not a valid status update. In particular, it
> > does not specify a date for your next update.
>
> You still have not delivered the status update due thirteen days ago. If I do
> not hear from you a fully-conforming status update by 2016-06-28 03:00 UTC, or
> if this item ever again becomes overdue for a status update, I will transfer
> the item to release management team ownership.

This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner. Would any other
committer like to take ownership? I see Teodor committed some things relevant
to this item just today, so the task may be as simple as verifying that those
commits resolve the item. If this role interests you, please read this thread
and the policy linked above, then send an initial status update bearing a date
for your subsequent status update. If the item does not have a permanent
owner by 2016-07-01 07:00 UTC, I will resolve the item by reverting all phrase
search commits.

Thanks,
nm

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Etsuro Fujita 2016-06-28 07:22:28 Re: Postgres_fdw join pushdown - wrong results with whole-row reference
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-06-28 06:23:07 Re: Postgres_fdw join pushdown - wrong results with whole-row reference