Hi all, 
Which one is better (performance/easier to use),
tsearch2 or fulltextindex? 
there is an example how to use fulltextindex in the
techdocs, but I checked the contrib/fulltextindex
package, there is a WARNING that fulltextindex is
much slower than tsearch2. but tsearch2 seems
complex to use, and I can not find a good example.
Which one I should use? Any suggestions?  

thanks and Regards,

----- Original Message -----
From: Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 5:33 pm
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] why index scan not working
when using 'like'?

> Tom Lane kirjutas T, 25.11.2003 kell 23:29:
> > Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > In regular text fields containing words, your
problem is 
> solvable with full 
> > > text indexing (FTI).   Unfortunately, FTI is
not designed for 
> arbitrary 
> > > non-language strings.  It could be adapted,
but would require a 
> lot of 
> > > hacking.
> > 
> > I'm not sure why you say that FTI isn't a usable
solution.  As 
> long as
> > the gene symbols are separated by whitespace or
some other non-
> letters> (eg, "foo mif bar" not "foomifbar"), I'd
think FTI would 
> work.
> If he wants to search on arbitrary substring, he
could change 
> tokeniserin FTI to produce trigrams, so that
"foomifbar" would be 
> indexed as if
> it were text "foo oom omi mif ifb fba bar" and
search for things like
> %mifb% should first do a FTI search for "mif" AND
"ifb" and then 
> simpleLIKE %mifb% to weed out something like "mififb".
> There are ways to use trigrams for 1 and 2 letter
matches as well.
> -------------
> Hannu
> ---------------------------(end of
> ----
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please
send an appropriate
>      subscribe-nomail command to
> your      message can get through to the mailing
list cleanly

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to