Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1neMWC-0004tC-Ca for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:49:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1neMWB-0002ET-3D for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:49:39 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1neMWA-0002EJ-Rn for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:49:38 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1neMW8-0008WP-QT for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:49:38 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 23CJnX1o911428; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 15:49:33 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: piotrowski@prisma.io, Pg Docs Subject: Re: "GIN and GiST Index Types" page is about usage in full text search, but looks general purpose In-reply-to: References: <164978902252.1276550.9330175733459697101@wrigleys.postgresql.org> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:34:52 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <911426.1649792973.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 15:49:33 -0400 Message-ID: <911427.1649792973@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > The page in question is "12.9. GIN and GiST Index Types", but it's > really supplementary information for "12.2.2. Creating Indexes". The > fact that the former has greater prominence than the latter (a general > discussion of FTS indexing) seems like a problem in itself. > At one point GiST was competitive with GIN for full text search > performance (or at least more competitive). These days use of GiST for > FTS should be rare. So the title should suggest that GiST FTS indexing > is the nonstandard choice. I think we should take the index type names out of the section title entirely, and name it something generic like "Preferred Index Types for Full Text Search". Unfortunately, with the EOL'd documentation versions being pretty much frozen in time, it's not clear that we can prevent Google from continuing to find that 9.1 page when the search terms include GIN and GIST. I suspect it's keying off those terms appearing in the page title :-( After the recent changes discussed on the -www list, it's possible that Google will eventually stop indexing the 9.1 page altogether, but I'm not holding my breath. regards, tom lane