Re: Initial ugly reverse-translator

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, Tom Lane wrote:

> Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I don't really see the problem.  I assume from your reference to pg_trgm
>>> that you're using trigram similarity as the prefilter for potential
>>> matches
>
>> It turns out that's no good anyway, as it appears to ignore characters
>> outside the ASCII range. Rather less than useful for searching a
>> database of translated strings ;-)
>
> A quick look at the pg_trgm code suggests that it is only prepared to
> deal with single-byte encodings; if you're working in UTF8, which I
> suppose you'd have to be, it's dead in the water :-(.  Perhaps fixing
> that should be on the TODO list.

as well as ltree. they are in our todo list:
http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/wiki/TODO

>
> But in any case maybe the full-text-search stuff would be more useful
> as a prefilter?  Although honestly, for the speed we need here, I'm
> not sure a prefilter is needed at all.  Full text might be useful
> if a LIKE-based match fails, though.
>
>>> (And besides, speed doesn't seem like the be-all and end-all here.)
>
>> True. It's not so much the speed as the fragility when faced with small
>> changes to formatting. In addition to whitespace, some clients mangle
>> punctuation with features like automatic "curly"-quoting.
>
> Yeah.  I was wondering whether encoding differences wouldn't be a huge
> problem in practice, as well.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
>

     Regards,
         Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83