On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Sushant Sinha <sushant...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes thats what I am planning to do. I just wanted to see if anyone >> can help me in estimating whether this is doable in the current >> parser or I need to write a new one. If possible, then some idea >> on how to go about implementing? > > The current tsearch parser is a state machine which does clunky mode > switches to handle special cases like you describe. If you're > looking at doing very much in there, you might want to consider a > rewrite to something based on regular expressions. See discussion > in these threads: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/200912102005.16560.and...@anarazel.de > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4b210d9e020000250002d...@gw.wicourts.gov > > That was actually at the top of my personal PostgreSQL TODO list > (after my current project is wrapped up), but I wouldn't complain if > someone else wanted to take it. :-)
If you end up rewriting it, it may be a good idea, in the initial rewrite, to mimic the current results as closely as possible - and then submit a separate patch to change the results. Changing two things at the same time exponentially increases the chance of your patch getting rejected. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
