| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: tsearch2 in PostgreSQL 8.3? |
| Date: | 2007-08-15 03:13:23 |
| Message-ID: | 21355.1187147603@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Since I don't think that a datatype solution is the way to go,
>> I don't feel that we are as far away from an agreement as Bruce
>> is worried about.
> Well, from where I sit, there is one person saying give me the foot gun,
> and Heikki saying he wants a bullet-proof type system, and you and I are
> in the middle, so the big problem is I don't see a concensus forming,
> and we have been discussing this for a while.
The people who actually use tsearch2 seem to all have the same opinion ...
so I think we can't go too far in the bullet-proofing direction.
But I would like a design that is bulletproof in dump/reload scenarios,
and I think it's fair to question that aspect of the tsearch2 design
because we've seen many reports of people having trouble updating
databases that use tsearch2.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-08-15 03:13:34 | Re: tsearch2 in PostgreSQL 8.3? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-08-15 03:05:34 | Re: tsearch2 in PostgreSQL 8.3? |