That is a long discussed thing. We can't formulate unconflicting rules... For
example:
1) a &[dist<=2] ( b &[dist<=3] c )
2) a &[dist<=2] ( b |[dist<=3] c )
3) a &[dist<=2] !c
4) a &[dist<=2] ( b |[dist<=3] !c )
5) a &[dist<=2] ( b & c )
What does exact they mean? What is tsvectors which should be matched by those
queries?
The simple solution is : under operation 'phrase search' (ok, it will be '+'
below) it must be only 'phrase search operations. I.e.:
a | b ( c + ( d + e ) ) - good
a | ( c + ( d & g ) ) - bad.
For example, we have word 'foonish' and after lexize we got two lexemes: 'foo1'
and 'foo2'. So a good query 'a + foonish' becomes 'a + ( foo1 | foo2 )'...
Mike Rylander wrote:
On 12/6/05, Marcus Engene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
A & (B | (New OperatorTheNextWordMustFollow York))
Actually, I love that idea. Oleg, would it be possible to create a
tsquery operator that understands proximity? Or, how allowing a
predicate to the current '&' op, as in '&[dist<=1]' meaning "next
token follows with a max distance of 1". I imagine that it would
only be useful on unstripped tsvectors, but if the lexem position is
already stored ...
--
Mike Rylander
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPLS -- PINES Development
Database Developer
http://open-ils.org
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
