Re: tsvector pg_stats seems quite a bit off.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>
Cc: Jesper Krogh <jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: tsvector pg_stats seems quite a bit off.
Date: 2010-05-30 14:46:44
Message-ID: 5735.1275230804@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan =?UTF-8?Q?Urba=C5=84ski?= <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org> writes:
>> I think the only relevance of stopwords to the current problem is that
>> *if* stopwords have been removed, we would see a Zipfian distribution
>> with the first few entries removed, and I'm not sure if it's still
>> really Zipfian afterwards.

> That's why I was proposing to take s = 0.07 / (MCE-count + 10). But that probably doesn't matter much.

Oh, now I get the point of that. Yeah, it is probably a good idea.
If the input doesn't have stopwords removed, the worst that will happen
is we'll collect stats for an extra 10 or so lexemes, which will then
get thrown away when they don't fit into the MCE list. +1.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-05-30 14:50:19 Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-05-30 14:41:58 Re: pg_trgm