Re: Proposal: syntax of operation with tsearch's configuration
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal: syntax of operation with tsearch's configuration |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 455E02B8.8020104@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal: syntax of operation with tsearch's configuration (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal: syntax of operation with tsearch's configuration
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Teodor Sigaev wrote: > Hmm, IMHO, it's needed for consistent interface: nobody adds new > column to table by editing pg_class & pg_attribute, nobody looks for > description of table by selection values from system table. > > > Tom Lane wrote: >> Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> writes: >>> Now we (Oleg and me) are working on moving tsearch into core. >>> Pls, review suggested syntax. Comments, suggestions, objections will >>> be appreciated. >> >> Is it really necessary to invent a batch of special-purpose commands? >> Seems like this will add some thousands of lines of code and no actual >> new functionality; not to mention loss of backwards compatibility for >> existing tsearch2 users. >> >> > Thousands of lines seems a high estimate, but maybe I'm wrong. I guess an alternative would be to do this in some builtin functions, but that seems a tad unclean. I am also a bit concerned that the names of the proposed objects (parser, dictionary) don't convey their purpose adequately. Maybe TS_DICTIONARY and TS_PARSER might be better if we in fact need to name them. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: