> I guess yous are talking about position search only... I'm thinking about all kind of searches inside the move data, but especially position search is the most important case.
> Maybe the correct answer is that search order is not important to a > position search. If doing a full search of a game and it has multiple > matches, all matches be shown in the results. But of course > implementing this is not trivial, and probably not worth the effort as > it would be rarely occuring ? I think you're right that the search order is not the most important thing, but I also think that some kind of search order is expected by the user, e.g. the match inside a main line has a higher precedence than a match inside the variation, especially if the search is aborting after the first match. Showing all search results is another thing, in this case the search order doesn't matter - no problem to sort the results. The main reason for this thread is that I've redesigned the move section of the database, the new database version will provide optimal performance when searching. The complexity of the implementation does not significantly depend on the search order. But now it is time to decide about the search algorithm, the data layout depends on this decision. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Scidb-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scidb-users
