| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexey Chernyshov <a(dot)chernyshov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Victor Drobny <v(dot)drobny(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] new function for tsquery creartion |
| Date: | 2018-03-22 14:38:04 |
| Message-ID: | e1839299-f926-7714-cac2-878f0334ac84@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I am extending phrase operator <n> is such way that it will have <n,m>
> syntax that means from n to m words, so I will use such syntax (<n,m>)
> further. I found that a AROUND(N) b is exactly the same as a <-N,N> b
> and it can be replaced while parsing. So, what do you think of such
> idea? In this patch I have noticed some unobvious behavior.
I think new operator should be a subject for separate patch. And I prefer idea
about range phrase operator.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-03-22 14:38:27 | Re: WIP: a way forward on bootstrap data |
| Previous Message | John Naylor | 2018-03-22 14:21:18 | Re: WIP: a way forward on bootstrap data |