Re: something better than pgtrgm?

Thanks, but no, we do need the performance
And we have admins (not users) enter the names and codes, but we can't make
it way complicated to do that.
I thought you meant that they see to it that the names end up in the
database under the correct encoding (which is a logical thing to do..)

Thanks anyway :)!

WBL

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 03:54:35PM +0200, Willy-Bas Loos wrote:
> >
> > > If so, I
> > > can almost imagine a way this could work
> > >
> >
> > Great! How?
>
> Well, it involves very large tables. But basically, you work out a
> "variant" table for any language you like, and then query across it
> with subsets of the trigrams you were just working with. It probably
> sucks in performance, but at least you're likely to get valid
> sequences this way.
>
> For inspiration on this (and why I have so much depressing news on the
> subject of internationalization in a multi-script and multi-lingual
> environment), see RFC 3743 and RFC 4290. These are related (among
> other things) to how to make "variants" of different DNS labels
> somehow hang together. The problem is not directly related to what
> you're working on, but it's a similar sort of problem: people have
> rough ideas of what they're entering, and they need an exact match.
> You have the good fortune of being able to provide them with a hint!
> I wish I were in your shoes.
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

--
"Quality comes from focus and clarity of purpose" -- Mark Shuttleworth