From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su>
Cc: Michael Riess <mlriess@gmx.de>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 13:02:12 -0500
Message-ID: <7983.1133892132@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200512061727.jB6HRVN18473@candle.pha.pa.us>
References: <200512061727.jB6HRVN18473@candle.pha.pa.us>
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Oleg Bartunov wrote:
>> Tsearch2 integration into pgsql would be cool, but, I see no problem to
>> use tsearch2 as an official extension module.
> Agreed. There isn't anything magical about a plug-in vs something
> integrated, as least in PostgreSQL.
The quality gap between contrib and the main system is a lot smaller
than it used to be, at least for those contrib modules that have
regression tests. Main and contrib get equal levels of testing from
the buildfarm, so they're about on par as far as portability goes.
We could never say that before 8.1 ...
(Having said that, I think that tsearch2 will eventually become part
of core, but probably not for awhile yet.)
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, oleg@sai.msu.su, mlriess@gmx.de
Subject: Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
In-Reply-To: <7983.1133892132@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox