"Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Gregory Stark wrote: >> "Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > There is no question things would be clearer with only one text search >> > data type. The only value I can see to having a tsquery data type is >> > that you can store a tsquery value in a column, but why would that be >> > much better than just storing it in a TEXT field? >> >> When you try storing a tsquery in a column does it alert you if you have an >> invalid syntax at that point? Storing it as text would mean not finding out >> until you try to use the query. > > Yes it does check syntax: > > test=> select 'lkjadsf kjfdsa'::tsquery; > ERROR: syntax error in tsearch query: "lkjadsf kjfdsa" > > A larger question is how many people store queries in the database to > make it worth the complexity.
So would this still happen if you didn't have a tsquery type? Or would it throw the error only when the actual matching operator executed and tried to parse the text? >> Is converting a text query into the internal format faster or less memory >> intensive than converting text into the internal representation? When you run >> a query like "WHERE '...' @@ col" if there wasn't a tsquery data type then >> '...' would have to be parsed over and over again for each row. > > No, internally the TEXT string would be converted to something the > system could deal with for that query, which is probably what 99% of all > queries are going to do anyway by calling to_tsquery(). How would that happen if there wasn't a tsquery type? -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
