From: Michael Riess <mlriess@gmx.de>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:59:14 +0100
Message-ID: <dn4g10$2n6b$1@news.hub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0512061143170.5133@localhost.localdomain>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0512061143170.5133@localhost.localdomain>
> Has anyone ever compared TSearch2 to Lucene, as far as performance is
> concerned?
I'll stay away from TSearch2 until it is fully integrated in the
postgres core (like "create index foo_text on foo (texta, textb) USING
TSearch2"). Because a full integration is unlikely to happen in the near
future (as far as I know), I'll stick to Lucene.
Mike
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: mlriess@gmx.de
Subject: Re: TSearch2 vs. Apache Lucene
In-Reply-To: <dn4g10$2n6b$1@news.hub.org>
* 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