| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | psql-mail(at)freeuk(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Tsearch2 or openFTS ? |
| Date: | 2003-08-06 14:53:29 |
| Message-ID: | 3F311669.1070709@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
OpenFTS vs Tsearch2
OpenFTS is a middleware between application and database, so it uses
tsearch2 as a storage, while database engine is used as a query executor
(searching). Everything else (parsing of documents, query processing,
linguistics) carry outs on client side. That's why OpenFTS has its own
configuration table (fts_conf) and works with its own set of dictionaries.
OpenFTS is more flexible, because it could be used in multi-server
architecture with separated machines for repository of documents
(documents could be stored in file system), database and query engine.
psql-mail(at)freeuk(dot)com wrote:
> While I continue trying to get tsearch2 up and running...
>
> When should a db designer opt for tsearch2 directly and when should
> they opt for openFTS?
>
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dennis Gearon | 2003-08-06 15:15:34 | Re: pg_dump corrupts database? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-06 14:45:55 | Re: tsearch2 on postgresql 7.3.4 |