On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 13:49 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 2) once we put this in core we are going to be stuck with supporting its
>> SQL API forever. Are we convinced that this API is the one we want?
>> I don't recall even having seen any proposal or discussion.
>
> There has been some prior discussion:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-12/msg00919.php
>
> But I agree that we need considerably more discussion before committing
> the patch. I'm personally not sold on the need for modifications to the
> SQL grammar, for example, as opposed to just using a set of SQL-callable
> functions and some new system catalogs.
>
> Another question that would be easier to resolve before the patch is
> committed is naming: the patch currently uses a mix of "full text" and
> "tsearch[2]" as the name of the full-text search feature. If we're going
> to bless this as "the" integrated full-text search in PG, it might make
> more sense to use "full text search" and "FTS" exclusively.
We tried to use full-text search (FTS) in the documentation
http://mira.sai.msu.su/~megera/pgsql/ftsdoc/index.html. Tsearch[2] used just
for historical notes, which may not go to the official documentation.
Regards, Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83
