Re: Is ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION PARSER = new_parser really sane?

From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION PARSER = new_parser really sane?
Date: 2007-08-22 03:56:30
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0708220753060.2727@sn.sai.msu.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:

> After starting to document this stuff I'm wondering whether it really
> makes sense to change the parser associated with a tsearch
> configuration. The problem is that the new parser might have an
> unrelated set of token types, but we don't do anything about updating
> the configuration's mappings.

looks reasonable, we could always create new parser.

>
> Ensuring sane behavior here would take a whole lot of new code, and
> I'm not sure that I see a use-case that justifies it. So I'm tempted to
> take out that particular ALTER capability altogether. I note that the
> corresponding feature of changing a dictionary's template on-the-fly
> doesn't exist (though it'd actually be a lot easier to support).

yes, here we tried to be sane

>
> Comments?

Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-08-22 05:25:20 Re: Crash with empty dictionary
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2007-08-22 03:45:49 Re: tsearch2 patch status report