Re: For full text indexing, which is better, tsearch2 or - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Steve Atkins
Subject Re: For full text indexing, which is better, tsearch2 or
Date
Msg-id 20031128203700.GA19831@gp.word-to-the-wise.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: For full text indexing, which is better, tsearch2 or  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Responses Re: For full text indexing, which is better, tsearch2 or
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 01:18:48PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>
> >Any thoughts?
>
> Actually, I ran my tests using tsearch V1.  I wonder if there has been
> some weird regression between tsearch 1 and 2?

Maybe. tsearch2 doesn't seem production ready in other respects
(untsearch2.sql barfs with 'aggregate stat(tsvector) does not exist'
and the openfts mailing list, where this would be more appropriate,
doesn't appear to exist according to sourceforge).

So, using the same data, modulo a few alter tables, I try tsearch, V1.
It's a little slower than V2, and again runs far faster without an
index than with it. Broken in the same way.

I have 7.2.4 running on a Sun box, so I tried that too, with similar
results. tsearch just doesn't seem to work very well on this dataset
(or any other large dataset I've tried).

Cheers,
  Steve

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Suchandra Thapa
Date:
Subject: Re: Maximum Possible Insert Performance?
Next
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: Re: For full text indexing, which is better, tsearch2 or