Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Since I don't think that a datatype solution is the way to go, > >> I don't feel that we are as far away from an agreement as Bruce > >> is worried about. > > > Well, from where I sit, there is one person saying give me the foot gun, > > and Heikki saying he wants a bullet-proof type system, and you and I are > > in the middle, so the big problem is I don't see a concensus forming, > > and we have been discussing this for a while. > > The people who actually use tsearch2 seem to all have the same opinion ... > so I think we can't go too far in the bullet-proofing direction. > > But I would like a design that is bulletproof in dump/reload scenarios, > and I think it's fair to question that aspect of the tsearch2 design > because we've seen many reports of people having trouble updating > databases that use tsearch2.
Yea, look at the trouble we are having trying to underestand it all. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
