Re: [HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Teodor Sigaev]

That didn't cover all the places that needed to be fixed, but I have
re-read the docs and believe I've made things good now.

I have reviewed this thread and verified that all the cases raised in it
now work as desired, so I have marked the open item closed.


Thank you very much!
--
Teodor Sigaev   E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru
   WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Tom Lane]

Oleg Bartunov  writes:
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Noah Misch  wrote:
> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner.  Would any other
> committer like to take ownership?  I see Teodor committed some things relevant
> to this item just today, so the task may be as simple as verifying that those
> commits resolve the item.

> I attached a little documentation patch to textsearch.sgml.

That didn't cover all the places that needed to be fixed, but I have
re-read the docs and believe I've made things good now.

I have reviewed this thread and verified that all the cases raised in it
now work as desired, so I have marked the open item closed.

regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Oleg Bartunov]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Oleg Bartunov  wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Noah Misch  wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:22:26PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:08:54AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>>> > > > > > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic 
>>> > > > > > notification.]
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open 
>>> > > > > > item.  Teodor,
>>> > > > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you 
>>> > > > > > own this open
>>> > > > > > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not 
>>> > > > > > belong as a
>>> > > > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the 
>>> > > > > > policy on
>>> > > > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours 
>>> > > > > > of this
>>> > > > > > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  
>>> > > > > > Testers may
>>> > > > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get 
>>> > > > > > them all fixed
>>> > > > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will 
>>> > > > > > appreciate your
>>> > > > > > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > [1] 
>>> > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  
>>> > > > > Kindly send
>>> > > > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your 
>>> > > > > subsequent status
>>> > > > > update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
>>> > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long 
>>> > > >past due
>>> > > >for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on 
>>> > > >open
>>> > > >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from 
>>> > > >you by
>>> > > >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management 
>>> > > >team
>>> > > >ownership without further notice.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >[1] 
>>> > > >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm working on it right now.
>>> >
>>> > That is good news, but it is not a valid status update.  In particular, it
>>> > does not specify a date for your next update.
>>>
>>> You still have not delivered the status update due thirteen days ago.  If I 
>>> do
>>> not hear from you a fully-conforming status update by 2016-06-28 03:00 UTC, 
>>> or
>>> if this item ever again becomes overdue for a status update, I will transfer
>>> the item to release management team ownership.
>>
>> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner.  Would any other
>> committer like to take ownership?  I see Teodor committed some things 
>> relevant
>> to this item just today, so the task may be as simple as verifying that those
>> commits resolve the item.  If this role interests you, please read this 
>> thread
>> and the policy linked above, then send an initial status update bearing a 
>> date
>> for your subsequent status update.  If the item does not have a permanent
>> owner by 2016-07-01 07:00 UTC, I will resolve the item by reverting all 
>> phrase
>> search commits.
>
> Teodor pushed three patches, two of them fix the issues discussed in
> this topic (working with duplicates and disable fallback to & for
> stripped tsvector)
>  and the one about precedence of phrase search tsquery operator, which
> was discussed in separate thread
> (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/576AB63C.7090504%40sigaev.ru#576ab63c.7090...@sigaev.ru)
>
> They all look good, but need small documentation patch. I will provide it 
> later.

I attached a little documentation patch to textsearch.sgml.

>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> nm
--- textsearch.sgml	2016-06-29 00:21:53.0 +0300
+++ /Users/postgres/textsearch.sgml.new	2016-06-29 00:06:36.0 +0300
@@ -358,14 +358,18 @@
 SELECT phraseto_tsquery('cats ate rats');
phraseto_tsquery
 ---
- ( 'cat' - 'ate' ) - 'rat'
+ 'cat' - 'ate' - 'rat'
 
 SELECT phraseto_tsquery('the cats ate the rats');
phraseto_tsquery
 ---
- ( 'cat' - 'ate' ) 2 'rat'
+ 'cat' - 'ate' 2 'rat'
 

+   
+ The precedence of tsquery operators is as follows: |, , 
+ -, !.
+   
   
 
   
@@ -923,7 +927,7 @@
 SELECT phraseto_tsquery('english', 'The Fat  Rats:C');
   phraseto_tsquery
 -
- ( 'fat' - 

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Oleg Bartunov]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Noah Misch  wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:22:26PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:08:54AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> > > > > > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. 
>> > > > > >  Teodor,
>> > > > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own 
>> > > > > > this open
>> > > > > > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not 
>> > > > > > belong as a
>> > > > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the 
>> > > > > > policy on
>> > > > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of 
>> > > > > > this
>> > > > > > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  
>> > > > > > Testers may
>> > > > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get 
>> > > > > > them all fixed
>> > > > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will 
>> > > > > > appreciate your
>> > > > > > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > [1] 
>> > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  
>> > > > > Kindly send
>> > > > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your 
>> > > > > subsequent status
>> > > > > update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
>> > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>> > > >
>> > > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long 
>> > > >past due
>> > > >for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on 
>> > > >open
>> > > >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from 
>> > > >you by
>> > > >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management 
>> > > >team
>> > > >ownership without further notice.
>> > > >
>> > > >[1] 
>> > > >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
>> > >
>> > > I'm working on it right now.
>> >
>> > That is good news, but it is not a valid status update.  In particular, it
>> > does not specify a date for your next update.
>>
>> You still have not delivered the status update due thirteen days ago.  If I 
>> do
>> not hear from you a fully-conforming status update by 2016-06-28 03:00 UTC, 
>> or
>> if this item ever again becomes overdue for a status update, I will transfer
>> the item to release management team ownership.
>
> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner.  Would any other
> committer like to take ownership?  I see Teodor committed some things relevant
> to this item just today, so the task may be as simple as verifying that those
> commits resolve the item.  If this role interests you, please read this thread
> and the policy linked above, then send an initial status update bearing a date
> for your subsequent status update.  If the item does not have a permanent
> owner by 2016-07-01 07:00 UTC, I will resolve the item by reverting all phrase
> search commits.

Teodor pushed three patches, two of them fix the issues discussed in
this topic (working with duplicates and disable fallback to & for
stripped tsvector)
 and the one about precedence of phrase search tsquery operator, which
was discussed in separate thread
(https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/576AB63C.7090504%40sigaev.ru#576ab63c.7090...@sigaev.ru)

They all look good, but need small documentation patch. I will provide it later.



>
> Thanks,
> nm


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:22:26PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:08:54AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > > > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  
> > > > > > Teodor,
> > > > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own 
> > > > > > this open
> > > > > > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not 
> > > > > > belong as a
> > > > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the 
> > > > > > policy on
> > > > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of 
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  
> > > > > > Testers may
> > > > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them 
> > > > > > all fixed
> > > > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will 
> > > > > > appreciate your
> > > > > > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [1] 
> > > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > > > 
> > > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  
> > > > > Kindly send
> > > > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your 
> > > > > subsequent status
> > > > > update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > > 
> > > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long 
> > > >past due
> > > >for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on 
> > > >open
> > > >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from you 
> > > >by
> > > >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management 
> > > >team
> > > >ownership without further notice.
> > > >
> > > >[1] 
> > > >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > 
> > > I'm working on it right now.
> > 
> > That is good news, but it is not a valid status update.  In particular, it
> > does not specify a date for your next update.
> 
> You still have not delivered the status update due thirteen days ago.  If I do
> not hear from you a fully-conforming status update by 2016-06-28 03:00 UTC, or
> if this item ever again becomes overdue for a status update, I will transfer
> the item to release management team ownership.

This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item now needs a permanent owner.  Would any other
committer like to take ownership?  I see Teodor committed some things relevant
to this item just today, so the task may be as simple as verifying that those
commits resolve the item.  If this role interests you, please read this thread
and the policy linked above, then send an initial status update bearing a date
for your subsequent status update.  If the item does not have a permanent
owner by 2016-07-01 07:00 UTC, I will resolve the item by reverting all phrase
search commits.

Thanks,
nm


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:08:54AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
> > > > > 
> > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  
> > > > > Teodor,
> > > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own 
> > > > > this open
> > > > > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not 
> > > > > belong as a
> > > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the 
> > > > > policy on
> > > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of 
> > > > > this
> > > > > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers 
> > > > > may
> > > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them 
> > > > > all fixed
> > > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate 
> > > > > your
> > > > > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > [1] 
> > > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > > 
> > > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  
> > > > Kindly send
> > > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent 
> > > > status
> > > > update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > 
> > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past 
> > >due
> > >for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
> > >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from you by
> > >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
> > >ownership without further notice.
> > >
> > >[1] 
> > >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > 
> > I'm working on it right now.
> 
> That is good news, but it is not a valid status update.  In particular, it
> does not specify a date for your next update.

You still have not delivered the status update due thirteen days ago.  If I do
not hear from you a fully-conforming status update by 2016-06-28 03:00 UTC, or
if this item ever again becomes overdue for a status update, I will transfer
the item to release management team ownership.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 03:02:15PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:54:33AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
> > > > 
> > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  
> > > > Teodor,
> > > > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this 
> > > > open
> > > > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong 
> > > > as a
> > > > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the 
> > > > policy on
> > > > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
> > > > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
> > > > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all 
> > > > fixed
> > > > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate 
> > > > your
> > > > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > [1] 
> > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > > 
> > > This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  Kindly 
> > > send
> > > a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent 
> > > status
> > > update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> > 
> >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due
> >for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
> >item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from you by
> >2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
> >ownership without further notice.
> >
> >[1] 
> >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> 
> I'm working on it right now.

That is good news, but it is not a valid status update.  In particular, it
does not specify a date for your next update.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Teodor Sigaev]

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due
for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from you by
2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
ownership without further notice.

[1] 
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com


I'm working on it right now.

--
Teodor Sigaev   E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru
   WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 06:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Jean-Pierre Pelletier  writes:
> > > > I wanted to test if phraseto_tsquery(), new with 9.6 could be used for
> > > > matching consecutive words but it won't work for us if it cannot handle
> > > > consecutive *duplicate* words.
> > > 
> > > > For example, the following returns true:select
> > > > phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 
> > > > 'blue');
> > > 
> > > > Is this expected ?
> > > 
> > > I concur that that seems like a rather useless behavior.  If we have
> > > "x <-> y" it is not possible to match at distance zero, while if we
> > > have "x <-> x" it seems unlikely that the user is expecting us to
> > > treat that identically to "x".  So phrase search simply should not
> > > consider distance-zero matches.
> > 
> > [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
> > 
> > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  Teodor,
> > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> > item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> > 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
> > message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
> > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all 
> > fixed
> > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate your
> > efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> > 
> > [1] 
> > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com
> 
> This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  Kindly send
> a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
> update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED.  This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is long past due
for your status update.  Please reacquaint yourself with the policy on open
item ownership[1] and then reply immediately.  If I do not hear from you by
2016-06-16 07:00 UTC, I will transfer this item to release management team
ownership without further notice.

[1] 
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:10:40AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 06:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Jean-Pierre Pelletier  writes:
> > > I wanted to test if phraseto_tsquery(), new with 9.6 could be used for
> > > matching consecutive words but it won't work for us if it cannot handle
> > > consecutive *duplicate* words.
> > 
> > > For example, the following returns true:select
> > > phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue');
> > 
> > > Is this expected ?
> > 
> > I concur that that seems like a rather useless behavior.  If we have
> > "x <-> y" it is not possible to match at distance zero, while if we
> > have "x <-> x" it seems unlikely that the user is expecting us to
> > treat that identically to "x".  So phrase search simply should not
> > consider distance-zero matches.
> 
> [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
> 
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  Teodor,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
> message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate your
> efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> 
> [1] 
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com

This PostgreSQL 9.6 open item is past due for your status update.  Kindly send
a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] Re: Should phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue') be true ?

[Noah Misch]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 06:05:10PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jean-Pierre Pelletier  writes:
> > I wanted to test if phraseto_tsquery(), new with 9.6 could be used for
> > matching consecutive words but it won't work for us if it cannot handle
> > consecutive *duplicate* words.
> 
> > For example, the following returns true:select
> > phraseto_tsquery('simple', 'blue blue') @@ to_tsvector('simple', 'blue');
> 
> > Is this expected ?
> 
> I concur that that seems like a rather useless behavior.  If we have
> "x <-> y" it is not possible to match at distance zero, while if we
> have "x <-> x" it seems unlikely that the user is expecting us to
> treat that identically to "x".  So phrase search simply should not
> consider distance-zero matches.

[Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]

The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  Teodor,
since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate your
efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.

[1] 
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.ga447...@tornado.leadboat.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers