I think there is a need to provide prefix search to bypass dictionaries.If you folks think that there is some credibility to such a need then I can think about implementing it. How about an operator like ":#" that does this? The ":*" will continue to mean the same as currently.
-Sushant. On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 23:45 +0530, Sushant Sinha wrote: > On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 19:27 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote: > > > Assume, for example, that the postgres mailing list archive search used > > tsearch (which I think it does, but I'm not sure). It'd then probably make > > sense to add "postgres" to the list of stopwords, because it's bound to > > appear in nearly every mail. But wouldn't you want searched which include > > 'postgres*' to turn up empty? Quite certainly not. > > That improves recall for "postgres:*" query and certainly doesn't help > other queries like "post:*". But more importantly it affects precision > for all queries like "a:*", "an:*", "and:*", "s:*", 't:*', "the:*", etc > (When that is the only search it also affects recall as no row matches > an empty tsquery). Since stopwords are smaller, it means prefix search > for a few characters is meaningless. And I would argue that is when the > prefix search is more important -- only when you know a few characters. > > > -Sushant -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
