| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Teodor Sigaev" <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Oleg Bartunov" <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected? |
| Date: | 2007-06-15 19:55:57 |
| Message-ID: | 87r6odouuq.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
"Teodor Sigaev" <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> writes:
>> Hm, are you trying to say that it's sane to have different tsvectors in
>> a column computed under different language settings? Maybe we're all
>
> Yes, I think so.
>
> That might have sense for close languages. Norwegian languages has two dialects
> and one of them has advanced rules for compound words, russian and ukranian has
> similar rules etc. Operation @@ is language (and encoding) independent, it use
> just strcmp call.
To support this sanely though wouldn't you need to know which language rule a
tsvector was generated with? Like, have a byte in the tsvector tagging it with
the language rule forever more?
What I'm wondering about is if you use a different rule than what was used
when an index entry was inserted will you get different results using the
index than you would doing a sequential scan and reapplying the operator to
every datum?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2007-06-15 20:08:02 | Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected? |
| Previous Message | Josh | 2007-06-15 17:22:41 | Re: The Business Case for PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2007-06-15 20:08:02 | Re: How does the tsearch configuration get selected? |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-06-15 19:49:58 | Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints, revised patch |