2012/10/25 Kevin Grittner <kgri...@mail.com>:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Kevin Grittner" <kgri...@mail.com> writes:
>> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> >> 2012/10/22 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> >>> Perhaps it would be close enough to what you want to use DISTINCT ON:
>> >>> contrib_regression=# explain select distinct on( t <-> 'foo') *,t <->
>> >>> 'foo' from test_trgm order by t <-> 'foo' limit 10;
>>
>> >> good tip - it's working
>>
>> > If two or more values happen to be at exactly the same distance,
>> > wouldn't you just get one of them?
>>
>> Yeah, that is a hazard. I'm not sure whether <->'s results are
>> sufficiently quantized to make that a big problem in practice.
>
> It doesn't seem too far-fetched for trigram queries:
>
> test=# select nm, nm <-> 'anders' from (values
> ('anderson'),('andersen'),('andersly')) x(nm);
> nm | ?column?
> ----------+----------
> anderson | 0.4
> andersen | 0.4
> andersly | 0.4
> (3 rows)
>
> test=# select distinct on (nm <-> 'anders') nm, nm <-> 'anders' from (values
> ('anderson'),('andersen'),('andersly')) x(nm) order by nm <-> 'anders' limit
> 3;
> nm | ?column?
> ----------+----------
> anderson | 0.4
> (1 row)
yes it is issue - but I am thinking about simple "fuzzy" searching, so
exact result is not strongly expected. On second hand if SELECT
DISTINCT * will be supported it should be nice.
Pavel
>
> -Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
