Re: procost for to_tsvector

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 10:03:01AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> Andrew did the research to support a higher value, but even 10 should
> >> be an improvement over what we have now.
> >
> > Yes, I saw that, but I didn't see him recommend an actual number.  Can
> > someone recommend a number now?   Tom initially recommended 10, but
> > Andrew's tests suggest something > 100.  Tom didn't do any tests so I
> > tend to favor Andrew's suggestion, if he has one.
> 
> In the OP, he suggested "on the order of 100".  Maybe we could just go with 100.

OK, I will go with 100 unless I hear otherwise.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + Everyone has their own god. +