Re: tsearch_core for inclusion

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Surely the CREATE INDEX syntax has got enough warts on it already.
>
>> Do you mean something like:
>> CREATE INDEX ftil ON t1 USING GIST|GIN(C1 FULLTEXT);
>> Where FULLTEXT is like VARCHAR OPS?
>
> Yeah, that one. It might be more consistent to spell it as "fulltext_ops"
> but I wouldn't insist on it.

*shrug* fulltext_ops is probably more accurate but FULLTEXT is more
friendly :). I find you normally can't have both, my vote would probably
be consistency.

>
> Of course the issue not addressed here is where you specify all the
> secondary configuration data (the stuff currently handled by config
> tables in the contrib implementation). Perhaps the WITH clause would
> work for that, though in the current code WITH is targeted at the index
> AM not individual opclasses.

Not sure what to say here. WITH seems logical and I don't think we want
to add yet another keyword but I certainly see your point.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> regards, tom lane
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/