If all your new "keyword" field will be contain is data that already exists in its native form in some other field then, IMHO, your are "overdesigning" your project. A FT index can index your original field just as well as it could index your "extracted" field.
Unless you are adding new values to your "keywords" field (like synonyms or common misspellings) that don't exist in your origninal data, I think you should lose the second field from your design and just FT index your original data. If you do add the additional data to your record, you should FT index both columns (the "original" data column and the new "keywords" column) with the same index. Shawn Green Database Administrator Unimin Corporation - Spruce Pine "leegold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/07/2004 10:07:22 AM: > I asked a ques, in a previous post but maybe I should simplify the > question. Am I totallly crazy to use FullText for specific keyword > searchs? Let's say I have a text data type field and I load it with > keywords (text after all), the couldn't I just use a Fulltext index on > that field then search for specific keywords? I'd have the boolean mode > with a minimum of coding. > > If not, well, I haven't found tutorials that lay it out how to code for > "and, or, phrase, not" searches without Fulltext. I assume it'd be some > more SQL to do that. I'm not too handy with set theory at the moment - > it seems the fulltext pust me on the road to having a nice keyword > search w/bells and whistles w/min. of hassel even though I'm not using > it for it's heralded intended purpose. > > Thanks, > Lee G. > Wash DC > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
