Re: OK, does anyone have any better ideas?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OK, does anyone have any better ideas?
Date: 2000-12-08 19:21:23
Message-ID: 1494.976303283@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice

mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
> I have a working version of a text search engine. I want to make it work
> for Postgres (I will be releasing it GPL). It can literally find the
> occurrence of a string of words within 5 million records in a few
> milliseconds.

Where are the records coming from? Are they inside the database?
(If not, why do you care about integrating this with Postgres?)

It seems like the right way to integrate this sort of functionality
is to turn it into a kind of index, so that you can do

SELECT * FROM mytable WHERE keyfield ~~~ 'search string';

where ~~~ is the name of some operator that is associated with the
index. The temporary-table approach you are taking seems inherently
klugy, and would still be awkward even if we had functions returning
recordsets...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniele Orlandi 2000-12-08 19:37:02 Re: AW: beta testing version
Previous Message Bruce Guenter 2000-12-08 19:18:34 Re: CRC was: Re: beta testing version

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sterling 2000-12-08 19:26:30 Buncho-Text during commands.
Previous Message Bruno Dickhoff 2000-12-08 16:30:02 Re[2]: access.mdb import