On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Jan Przemysław Wójcik <jan.przemyslaw.woj...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm afraid that creating a function that implements quite different > algorithms depending on a global parameter seems very hacky and would lead > to misunderstandings. I do understand the need of backward compatibility, > but I'd opt for the lesser evil. Perhaps a good idea would be to change the > name to 'substring_similarity()' and introduce the new function > 'word_similarity()' later, for example in the next major version release.
That breaks things for everybody using word_similarity() currently. If the previous discussion of this topic concluded that word_similarity() was an OK name despite being a slight misnomer, I don't think we should change our mind now. Instead the new function can be called something which makes the difference clear, e.g. strict_word_similarity(), and the old function can remain as it is. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
