Ever since I started using FTS, I'm always confronted with the problem that I need two tables: one FTS table with the TEXT columns, and one normal table with the INTEGER columns for numerical values. This causes all kinds of problems (keeping the rowid's in sync, complex queries, etc.).
>From a previous post from the author of FTS, I understand that it will be hard to implement datatypes for the virtual tables that FTS uses, so I already ruled that out as a solution. I could just store the numerical values as TEXT in the FTS table, but even the most simple operation (sorting for example) will be a challenge, since I have to format the numbers in such a way that they sort right (prepending zeroes to make them all the same length). But suppose I take all that into account, there still is another problem: FTS will unnecessary index all those extra columns. So would it be an idea to have a simple flag (NOINDEX for example) which dictates that a certain column shouldn't be indexed by FTS, just stored? It may be a lot simpler to implement than actual datatypes, and I could work around the other limitations myself. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
