Bruce Momjian schrieb:
> Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> tsearch2 and Lucene are very different search engines, so it'd be unfair
>> comparison. If you need full access to metadata and instant indexing
>> you, probably, find tsearch2 is more suitable then Lucene. But, if
>> you could live without that features and need to search read only
>> archives you need Lucene.
>>
>> Tsearch2 integration into pgsql would be cool, but, I see no problem to
>> use tsearch2 as an official extension module. After completing our
>> todo, which we hope will likely happens for 8.2 release, you could
>> forget about Lucene and other engines :) We'll be available for developing
>> in spring and we estimate about three months for our todo, so, it's
>> really doable.
>
> Agreed. There isn't anything magical about a plug-in vs something
> integrated, as least in PostgreSQL. In other database, plug-ins can't
> fully function as integrated, but in PostgreSQL, everything is really a
> plug-in because it is all abstracted.
I only remember evaluating TSearch2 about a year ago, and when I read
statements like "Vacuum and/or database dump/restore work differently
when using TSearch2, sql scripts need to be executed etc." I knew that I
would not want to go there.
But I don't doubt that it works, and that it is a sane concept.
