Re: [PROPOSAL] Improvements of Hunspell dictionaries support

From: Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Improvements of Hunspell dictionaries support
Date: 2015-10-21 10:57:50
Message-ID: 56276FAE.7000805@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

21.10.2015 01:37, Jim Nasby пишет:
> On 10/20/15 9:00 AM, Artur Zakirov wrote:
>> Internal representation of the dictionary in the PostgreSQL doesn't
>> impose too strict limits on the number of affix rules. There are a
>> flagval array, which size must be increased from 256 to 65000.
>
> Is that per dictionary entry, fixed at 64k? That seems pretty excessive,
> if that's the case...

This is per dictionary only. flagval array is used for the all
dictionary. And it is not used for every dictionary word.

There are also flag field of AFFIX structure, wich size must be
increased from 8 bit to 16 bit. This structure is used for every affix
in affix file.

--
Artur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Taiki Kondo 2015-10-21 11:07:03 Re: [Proposal] Table partition + join pushdown
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2015-10-21 10:55:34 Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual