| From: | Michael Riess <mlriess(at)gmx(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene |
| Date: | 2005-12-07 07:56:18 |
| Message-ID: | dn64it$17bk$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
No, my problem is that using TSearch2 interferes with other core
components of postgres like (auto)vacuum or dump/restore.
> ...
>
> So you'll avoid a non-core product and instead only use another non-core
> product...?
>
> Chris
>
> Michael Riess wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone ever compared TSearch2 to Lucene, as far as performance is
>>> concerned?
>>
>>
>> I'll stay away from TSearch2 until it is fully integrated in the
>> postgres core (like "create index foo_text on foo (texta, textb) USING
>> TSearch2"). Because a full integration is unlikely to happen in the
>> near future (as far as I know), I'll stick to Lucene.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-12-07 08:20:01 | Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2005-12-07 07:26:44 | Re: High context switches occurring |