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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to