On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
>>>> postgres=# select qty from orderlines ;
>>>> ERROR: 42703: column "qty" does not exist
>>>> HINT: Perhaps you meant to reference the column "orderlines"."quantity".
>
>>> I don't buy this example, because it would give you the same hint if
>>> you told it you wanted to access a column called ant, or uay, or tit.
>>> And that's clearly ridiculous. The reason why quantity looks like a
>>> reasonable suggestion for qty is because it's a conventional
>>> abbreviation, but an extremely high percentage of comparable cases
>>> won't be.
>
>> I maintain that omission of part of the correct spelling should be
>> weighed less.
>
> I would say that omission of the first letter should completely disqualify
> suggestions based on this heuristic; but it might make sense to weight
> omissions less after the first letter.
I think we would be well-advised not to start inventing our own
approximate matching algorithm. Peter's suggestion boils down to a
guess that the default cost parameters for Levenshtein suck, and your
suggestion boils down to a guess that we can fix the problems with
Peter's suggestion by bolting another heuristic on top of it - and
possibly running Levenshtein twice with different sets of cost
parameters. Ugh.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
