Re: Phrase search vs. multi-lexeme tokens

From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Neil Chen <carpenter(dot)nail(dot)cz(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Phrase search vs. multi-lexeme tokens
Date: 2021-01-29 13:51:03
Message-ID: CAPpHfdtZcqiEWa214HAQ+a-xpg+MYejerYyVCdQcYoY3D4PQ9A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 4:31 AM Neil Chen <carpenter(dot)nail(dot)cz(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:25 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> BTW, you mentioned you read the documentation. Do you think it needs
>> to be adjusted accordingly to the patch?
>>
>
> Yes, I checked section 8.11, section 9.13 and Chapter 12 of the document. The change of this patch did not conflict with the document, because it was not mentioned in the document at all. We can simply not modify it, or we can supplement these situations.

I've checked the docs myself and I think you're right (despite that's
surprising for me). It seems that this patch just changes
undocumented aspects of full-text search to be more consistent and
intuitive.

The revised patch is attached. This revision adds just comment and
commit message. I'm going to push this if no objections.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov

Attachment Content-Type Size
tsquery_phrase_fix_v2.patch application/octet-stream 22.6 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-01-29 13:59:01 Re: Allow matching whole DN from a client certificate
Previous Message vignesh C 2021-01-29 13:40:24 Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes