Re: Precedence of new phrase search tsquery operator
От | Oleg Bartunov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Precedence of new phrase search tsquery operator |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAF4Au4yrTOdFiVPNgWQyQV1a+38bNaoPJPvLF_GYAYo2wnXp0A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Precedence of new phrase search tsquery operator (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Precedence of new phrase search tsquery operator
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > It appears that the new <-> operator has been made to have exactly the > same grammatical precedence as the existing & (AND) operator. Thus, > for example, 'a & b <-> c'::tsquery means something different from > 'b <-> c & a'::tsquery: > > regression=# select 'a & b <-> c'::tsquery; > tsquery > ----------------------------------- > ( 'a' <-> 'c' ) & ( 'b' <-> 'c' ) > (1 row) > > regression=# select 'b <-> c & a'::tsquery; > tsquery > ----------------------- > ( 'b' <-> 'c' ) & 'a' > (1 row) > > I find this surprising. My intuitive feeling is that <-> ought to > bind tighter than & (and therefore also tighter than |). What's > the reasoning for making it act like this? ah, now we remember :) The idea about equivalence of & and <-> operators appeared in situation when <-> degenerates to & in case of absence of positional information. Looks like we mixed different things, will fix. > > regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: