X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D3C9DC875;
	Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:47:59 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 64341-09; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:47:59 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-
Received: from pdc.geeknet.com.au (ns1.geeknet.com.au [220.244.63.182])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BBFB9DD6C2;
	Sat, 25 Mar 2006 02:47:56 -0400 (AST)
Received: from livecd.geeknet.com.au ([192.168.61.103]) by pdc.geeknet.com.au
	with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830);
	Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:47:55 +1100
Subject: Re: search.postgresql.org
From: John Hansen <john@geeknet.com.au>
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>,
	PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060325022318.Y4637@ganymede.hub.org>
References: <4424DBC3.3020704@commandprompt.com>
	<15170.1143266875@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20060325022318.Y4637@ganymede.hub.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:45:28 +1100
Message-Id: <1143269128.8226.3.camel@livecd.geeknet.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2006 06:47:55.0162 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[0B87D7A0:01C64FD8]
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-7.0.0.1345-3.52.1006-14343.000
X-TM-AS-Result: No--5.400000-8.000000-31
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.106 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106]
X-Spam-Score: 0.106
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200603/137
X-Sequence-Number: 9727

On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 02:24 -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> >> I was looking at our search configuration and I noted that out of a
> >> weight of 100 we are only weighing archives at 50 and varlena at 25.
> >> That seems a little low as archives is the primary source of pratical
> >> and real world issues and varlena is a great resource.
> >
> > Um, what other resources are rated higher?  If you'll pardon my
> > ignorance, what other resources is the search engine considering at all?
> 
> And maybe a short explanation of what these 'weights' are all about?  Does 
> that just mean that when i search for something, archives results will 
> always preceed varlena's?  And, if so, and we are only doing archives vs 
> varlena, as long as archives is weighted higher then varlena, does it 
> matter what the weights are?  Could be 1 + 2, no?

That's right, the siteweights are just for making sure results from one
site is displayed before another.

A search on search.postgresql.org/archives.search ONLY considers the
archives anyways.

search.postgresql.org/www.search, however, returns results from all the
indexed sites, in order of relevance, with priority according to the
siteweights.

> 
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>        choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>        match