Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: rawi <only4com@web.de>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <1371137966540-5759046.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <22495.1371135398@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <1371123556877-5759021.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <22495.1371135398@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Subject: Re: Index Usage and Running Times by FullTextSearch with prefix
 matching
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org

Tom Lane-2 wrote
> FWIW, I get fairly decent performance for cases like this in HEAD
> (at least with a GIN index; GIST seems much less able to do well with
> short prefixes).

Short or long prefixes seem to be equaly unfavorable. Even with the full
length of the words, but queried as prefix I get a runtime of 25342ms
compared to 353ms without prefixes:

SELECT count(a)
FROM t1
WHERE a_tsvector @@ to_tsquery('aaaaa:* & bbbbb:* & ccccc:* & ddddd:*')

Total query runtime: 25342 ms

"Aggregate  (cost=804.02..804.03 rows=1 width=36)"
"  ->  Bitmap Heap Scan on t1  (cost=800.00..804.02 rows=1 width=36)"
"        Recheck Cond: (a_tsvector @@ to_tsquery('aaaaa:* & bbbbb:* &
ccccc:* & ddddd:*'::text))"
"        ->  Bitmap Index Scan on a_tsvector_idx  (cost=0.00..800.00 rows=1
width=0)"
"              Index Cond: (a_tsvector @@ to_tsquery('aaaaa:* & bbbbb:* &
ccccc:* & ddddd:*'::text))"

Kind Regards
Rawi


--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Index-Usage-and-Running-Times-by-FullTextSearch-with-prefix-matching-tp5759021p5759046.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - sql mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql