Well that wasn't too bad.  I wrote a patch and sent you a pull
request.  I don't have mysql installed here so I can't run those specs
until monday, but I'll double check that I didn't break anything then.
Doug

On Jan 24, 8:28 pm, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'll take a stab at it, on first look though it looks like it'll take
> some serious refactoringf.  Wish me luck! :)
> Doug
>
> On Jan 24, 7:35 pm, Pat Allan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Doug
>
> > I don't think anyone's really paid attention to this before... so it's  
> > not a known bug, but you're right, it should be fixed. MySQL will very  
> > likely do the same thing, but everything's abstracted enough that you  
> > won't be restructuring the raw SQL, but re-ordering method calls  
> > instead. If you want to have a go at making a patch, would love to see  
> > it :)
>
> > Cheers
>
> > --
> > Pat
>
> > On 25/01/2009, at 3:37 AM, Doug wrote:
>
> > > That's a mouthful, so I'll just show an example of what I mean:
>
> > >  define_index do
> > >    indexes [:address, amenities.name], :as => :full_text
> > >  end
>
> > > where amenities is some variety of has_many association.  In
> > > postgresql this produces the following sql in the config file:
>
> > > array_to_string(array_accum(COALESCE("properties"."address", '') || '
> > > ' || COALESCE("amenities"."name", '')), ' ')
>
> > > Which when run returns a string of the form: "address first_amenity
> > > address second_amenity address third_amenity" which while function
> > > ends up making a much larger index than is needed.  The correct SQL
> > > would be:
>
> > > COALESCE("properties"."address", '') || ' ' || array_to_string
> > > (array_accum(COALESCE("amenities"."name", '')), ' ')
>
> > > which returns: "address first_amenity second_amenity third_amenity",
> > > what you'd expect.  I haven't tried this on Mysql, but it looks like
> > > it might be doing the same thing.
>
> > > Has anyone else run into this?  Is it a known bug?  Can someone verify
> > > that this does the same thing in mysql?  I'm happy to write up a
> > > patch, but I wanted to make sure I was on the right track and no one
> > > else is working on it right now.
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Doug
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thinking Sphinx" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to