Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Oleg Bartunov
Subject Re: [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6
Date
Msg-id CAF4Au4xtkJgCNRhuK80xLM=B5L7puz75NKcgE-QAHnrgQ4yRTQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Phrase search ported to 9.6  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view


On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
What led you to choose the ? operator for the FOLLOWED BY semantics?
It doesn't seem a terribly natural choice -- most other things seems to
use ? as some sort of wildcard.  What about something like "...", so you
would do
  SELECT q @@ to_tsquery('fatal ... error');
and
  SELECT q @@ (tsquery 'fatal' ... tsquery 'error');


originally was $, but then we change it to ?, we don't remember why. During warming-up this morning we came to other suggestion

SELECT q @@ to_tsquery('fatal <> error');
and
SELECT q @@ to_tsquery('fatal <2> error');

How about this ?

 
--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics