Re: Performance for seq. scans

From: Steve Heaven <steve(at)thornet(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Jules Bean <jules(at)jellybean(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance for seq. scans
Date: 2000-07-26 11:39:22
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000726123922.0071cca8@mail.thornet.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

At 12:28 26/07/00 +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
>> We were in a similar position and went for the 'Full Text Indexing" extra.
>> You'll find it in contrib/fulltextindex.
>> It creates a function which you call on a trigger to produce an index of
>> words for specified fields. These indexes do get _very_ large (one of ours
>> is ~800 MB), but it does work very well and speeds searches up enormously.
>
>If I understand you correctly, that's word-based? It's just splitting
>on whitespace and punctuation? Unfortunately, that's not quite what
>we need --- our wildcard searches needn't have their '%' on word
>boundaries.
>

There is a function in the source called breakup(). This can be customised
to create the index entries on sub-word strings.

Steve

--
thorNET - Internet Consultancy, Services & Training
Phone: 01454 854413
Fax: 01454 854412
http://www.thornet.co.uk

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeffery Collins 2000-07-26 13:03:28 Some questions on user defined types and functions.
Previous Message Jules Bean 2000-07-26 11:28:18 Re: Performance for seq. scans