Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?
От | Noah Misch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160615065405.GB1043055@tornado.leadboat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ? (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@
to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 06:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Jean-Pierre Pelletier <jppelletier@e-djuster.com> writes: > > > > I wanted to test if phraseto_tsquery(), new with 9.6 could be used for > > > > matching consecutive words but it won't work for us if it cannot handle > > > > consecutive *duplicate* words. > > > > > > > For example, the following returns true: select > > > > phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue'); > > > > > > > Is this expected ? > > > > > > I concur that that seems like a rather useless behavior. If we have > > > "x <-> y" it is not possible to match at distance zero, while if we > > > have "x <-> x" it seems unlikely that the user is expecting us to > > > treat that identically to "x". So phrase search simply should not > > > consider distance-zero matches. > > > > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.] > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Teodor, > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a > > 9.6 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this > > message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1. Consequently, I will appreciate your > > efforts toward speedy resolution. Thanks. > > > > [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status > update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED. This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due for your status update. Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open item ownership[1] and then reply immediately. If I do not hear from you by 2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team ownership without further notice. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: