| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com, Jean-Pierre Pelletier <jppelletier(at)e-djuster(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ? |
| Date: | 2016-06-17 14:26:22 |
| Message-ID: | 19999.1466173582@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm, couldn't the loop logic be simplified a great deal if this is the
>> definition? Or are you leaving it like that with the idea that we might
>> later introduce another operator with the less-than-or-equal behavior?
> Do you suggest something like merge join of two sorted lists? ie:
> ...
> Such algorithm finds closest pair of (Lpos, Rpos) but satisfying pair could be
> not closest, example: to_tsvector('simple', '1 2 1 2') @@ '1 <3> 2';
Oh ... the indexes in the lists don't have much to do with the distances,
do they. OK, maybe it's not quite as easy as I was thinking. I'm
okay with the patch as presented.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2016-06-17 14:39:41 | Re: Restriction of windows functions |
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2016-06-17 14:06:52 | Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ? |