Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've coded a small patch to allow CaseSensitive synonyms. Applied with corrections (it'd be good if you at least pretended to test stuff before submitting it). Would a similar parameter be useful for any of the other

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 23:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've coded a small patch to allow CaseSensitive synonyms. Applied with corrections (it'd be good if you at least pretended to test stuff before submitting it). It is a frequent accusation of yours that

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Simon Riggs wrote: As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the purpose of eliciting general feedback. You yourself encourage a group development approach and specifically punish those people

Re: [PATCHES] tsvector prints pointer difference as int

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Kris Jurka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The tsvector code is printing a pointer difference as an integer, generating the following warning: tsvector.c: In function 'tsvectorin': tsvector.c:225: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but argument 2 has type 'long int' I was thinking the %td

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:24 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the purpose of eliciting general feedback. You yourself encourage a group

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Simon Riggs wrote: On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:24 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the purpose of eliciting general feedback. You

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think if you post something marked Work In Progress, there is an implied commitment on your part to post something complete at a later stage. It *wasn't* marked Work In Progress, and Simon went out of his way to cross-post it to -patches, where the

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 09:42 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: I think if you post something marked Work In Progress, there is an implied commitment on your part to post something complete at a later stage. So if it's forgotten you would be the one doing the forgetting. ;-) But if they aren't on

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Simon Riggs
On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 10:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: In future perhaps I should take it as a given that Simon doesn't expect his patches to be applied? I think you should take it as a given that Simon would like to try to work together, sharing ideas and code, without insults and public derision

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Simon Riggs wrote: As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the purpose of eliciting general feedback. You yourself encourage a group development approach and

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Oleg Bartunov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Tom Lane wrote: Would a similar parameter be useful for any of the other dictionary types? There are many things desirable to do with dictionaries, for example, say dictionary to return an original word plus it's normal form.

Re: [PATCHES] Sun Studio on Linux spinlock patch

2008-03-10 Thread Julius Stroffek
Tom Lane wrote: This patch seems broken in a number of ways. Why are you removing -DLINUX_PROFILE, for example? Are you sure you don't need -D_GNU_SOURCE? And why add -DSUNOS4_CC, which is a Solaris-specific define (not that we seem to be using it anywhere anymore)? Do we really have to have

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Hmm, I can see how some middleware would help with folding or not folding the input token, but what about the words coming from the dictionary file (particularly the *output* lexeme)? It's not apparent to me that it's sensible to try to control that from outside the dictionary. Right now I see

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Teodor Sigaev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm, I can see how some middleware would help with folding or not folding the input token, but what about the words coming from the dictionary file (particularly the *output* lexeme)? It's not apparent to me that it's sensible to try to control that

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Well, if you think this can/should be done somewhere outside the dictionary, should I revert the applied patch? No, that patch is about case sensitivity of synonym dictionary. I suppose, Simon wants to replace 'bill' to 'account', but doesn't want to get 'account Clinton' For another

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Include Lists for Text Search

2008-03-10 Thread Teodor Sigaev
Right now I see an significant advantage of such layer: two possible extension of dictionary (filtering and storing original form) are One more extension: drop too long words. For example, decrease limit of max length of word to prevent long to be indexed - word with 100 characters is

Re: [PATCHES] CopyReadLineText optimization

2008-03-10 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Another question that occurred to me - did you try using strpbrk() to look for the next interesting character rather than your homegrown searcher gadget? If so, how did that perform? It looks like strpbrk() performs poorly: unpatched: testname | min duration

Re: [PATCHES] CopyReadLineText optimization

2008-03-10 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: Another question that occurred to me - did you try using strpbrk() to look for the next interesting character rather than your homegrown searcher gadget? If so, how did that perform? It looks like strpbrk() performs poorly: Yes, not

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Zdenek Kotala [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is latest version of nonsegment support patch. I changed LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE to USE_SEGMENTED_FILES and I added -disable-segmented-files switch to configure. I kept tuplestore behavior and it still split file in both mode. Applied with minor

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)

2008-03-10 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Tom Lane wrote: Zdenek Kotala [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is latest version of nonsegment support patch. I changed LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE to USE_SEGMENTED_FILES and I added -disable-segmented-files switch to configure. I kept tuplestore behavior and it still split file in both mode.

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Applied with minor corrections. Why is this not the default when supported? Fear. Maybe eventually, but right now I think it's too risky. One point that I already found out the hard way is that sizeof(off_t) = 8 does not guarantee

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)

2008-03-10 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Tom Lane wrote: Zdenek Kotala [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is latest version of nonsegment support patch. I changed LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE to USE_SEGMENTED_FILES and I added -disable-segmented-files switch to configure. I kept tuplestore behavior and it

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)

2008-03-10 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also it would get more buildfarm coverage if it were default. If it breaks something we'll notice earlier. Since nothing the regression tests do even approach 1GB, the odds that the buildfarm will notice problems are approximately zero.