Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension
От | Jeff Janes |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMkU=1zwXSrRrGAqB23kAiR4EqL_dHKBPKi6DFYCfvPw7nuWkQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension (Artur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Artur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > On 14.03.2016 18:48, David Steele wrote: >> >> Hi Jeff, >> >> On 2/25/16 5:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> >>> But, It doesn't sound like I am going to win that debate. Given that, >>> I don't think we need a different name for the function. I'm fine with >>> explaining the word-boundary subtlety in the documentation, and >>> keeping the function name itself simple. >> >> >> It's not clear to me if you are requesting more documentation here or >> stating that you are happy with it as-is. Care to elaborate? >> >> Other than that I think this patch looks to be ready for committer. Any >> objections? >> > > There was some comments about the word-boundary subtlety. But I think it was > not enough. > > I rephrased the explanation of word_similarity() and %>. It is better now. > > But if it is not correct I can change the explanation. <% and <<-> are not documented at all. Is that a deliberate choice? Since they were added as convenience functions for the user, I think they really need to be in the user documentation. Also, the documentation should probably include <% and <<-> as the "parent" operators and use them in the examples, and only mention %> and <->> in passing, as the commutators. That is because <% and <<-> take their arguments in the same order as word_similarity does. It would be less confusing if the documentation and the examples didn't need to keep changing the argument orders. Cheers, Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: