Notice that :
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=r
and
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=d
do not provide same result (3 results by date, 1 by rank) even if only the
sorting is changed.
--
Cédric Villemain
Administrateur de Base de Données
Cel: +33
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different
upgrade at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
Magnus, we have parser for indexing pgdocs, do you need it ?
Yes, please!
//Magnus
--
Sent via
Cédric Villemain wrote:
Notice that :
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=r
and
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=d
do not provide same result (3 results by date, 1 by rank) even if
only the sorting is changed.
Actually, I get 5 and 7, in the
Le Wednesday 16 April 2008, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
Cédric Villemain wrote:
Notice that :
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=r
and
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=d
do not provide same result (3 results by date, 1 by rank) even if
Cédric Villemain wrote:
Le Wednesday 16 April 2008, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
Cédric Villemain wrote:
Notice that :
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=r
and
http://search.postgresql.org/search?q=tom+lanem=1l=d=1s=d
do not provide same result (3 results
I just searched for pg_standby and it looks like it is fixed now.
---
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:01 AM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 5:01
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different upgrade
at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
//Magnus
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I just searched for pg_standby and it looks like it is fixed now.
---
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different upgrade
at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
Oops, maybe it isn't fixed. I tried pg_standby and it seemed to work
but pg and standby returns the same results.
Is that correct? How do I test this?
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different upgrade
at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
Oops, maybe it isn't fixed. I tried pg_standby and it seemed to work
but pg and standby returns the same results.
Is that
Richard Huxton wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different
upgrade at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
Oops, maybe it isn't fixed. I tried pg_standby and it seemed to
work but pg and standby returns the
Magnus Hagander wrote:
Did you ever post the code to anybody other than Gevik? If not, please
send it to pgsql-www and someone can give it a quick look-over (perhaps
Oleg can help us there?)
Will do.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I didn't do anything, but possibly it got fixed by a different upgrade
at some point, and the recrawling of the sites.
Magnus, we have parser for indexing pgdocs, do you need it ?
//Magnus
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I just searched for pg_standby
Sergey Karpov prepared contrib/extend_parser, which we intend to use for
indexing pg-related documents. It handles '_' properly, so if anybody
interested, we could post it. Also, it can be useful for playing, since
it's standalone contrib module.
Oleg
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Richard Huxton wrote:
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
Sergey Karpov prepared contrib/extend_parser, which we intend to use for
indexing pg-related documents. It handles '_' properly, so if anybody
interested, we could post it. Also, it can be useful for playing, since
it's standalone contrib module.
Does it make sense to
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:01 AM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Gevik Babakhani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it's still on the TODO. Gevik has also been looking a bit
at it (I think - at
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Gevik Babakhani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it's still on the TODO. Gevik has also been looking a bit
at it (I think - at least he's indicated that he is), and he
recently got some new parser code to look at to see if we can
use to fix it.
I have the
Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Gevik Babakhani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it's still on the TODO. Gevik has also been looking a bit
at it (I think - at least he's indicated that he is), and he
recently got some new parser code
No, it's still on the TODO. Gevik has also been looking a bit at it (I
think - at least he's indicated that he is), and he recently got some nwe
parser code to look at to see if we can use to fix it.
//Magnus
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 10:23:28PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Has this been
No, it's still on the TODO. Gevik has also been looking a bit
at it (I think - at least he's indicated that he is), and he
recently got some new parser code to look at to see if we can
use to fix it.
I have the new parser code. Next week I have some time reserved to look at
it.
--
Sent
Has this been addressed?
---
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote:
No. It's on the list, but other things around the release haev priority.
I just returned from my Europe trip and have many
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote:
No. It's on the list, but other things around the release haev priority.
I just returned from my Europe trip and have many things to do :)
//Magnus
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 06:43:09PM -0800, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Hi guys any updates on this?
No. It's on the list, but other things around the release haev priority.
//Magnus
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 06:43:09PM -0800, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Hi guys any updates on this? Pinging you just so that we do not forget
it in the heap of mails in our inboxes.
Best regards,
On Feb 3, 2008
Hi guys any updates on this? Pinging you just so that we do not forget
it in the heap of mails in our inboxes.
Best regards,
On Feb 3, 2008 8:40 AM, Magnus Hagander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Hi All,
I just noticed a
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Hi All,
I just noticed a minor bug in our search results. Searching for
is_insteadbool in 8.3 docs returns the following page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/catalog-pg-rewrite.html
is_instead is a column, and
Hi All,
I just noticed a minor bug in our search results. Searching for
is_insteadbool in 8.3 docs returns the following page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/catalog-pg-rewrite.html
is_instead is a column, and bool is the datatype, both mentioned in
different columns. I know
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Hi All,
I just noticed a minor bug in our search results. Searching for
is_insteadbool in 8.3 docs returns the following page:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/catalog-pg-rewrite.html
is_instead is a column, and bool is the datatype,
26 matches
Mail list logo
