Message-ID: <44265C43.8010206@smet.org>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:17:55 +0200
From: Guillaume Smet <guillaume-pg@smet.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc3 (X11/20050929)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Cc: oleg@sai.msu.su, jd@commandprompt.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us,
	pgsql-www@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: search.postgresql.org
References: <00e301c65061$595eff0b$6a01a8c0@valehousing.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <00e301c65061$595eff0b$6a01a8c0@valehousing.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave Page wrote:
> The config being shown is the one used for the main www.postgresql.org site search, thus results from that site are favoured over external sites. The archives are ranked even lower because of the potential for additional noise.

Speaking of that, I noticed a problem a few days ago related to the 
scope of the search.

You can reproduce it this way:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/interactive/index.html

Search for alter table for example:
http://search.postgresql.org/www.search?ul=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.postgresql.org%2Fdocs%2F8.1%2Finteractive%2F%25&fm=on&cs=utf-8&q=ALTER+TABLE
You have 91 results and especially the results from the documentation.

But when you click on the search button again on the results page, the 
ul parameter is not here anymore and you have pretty bad results:
http://search.postgresql.org/www.search?cs=utf-8&fm=on&gr=on&o=0&ps=20&s=rate&q=ALTER+TABLE
We have only 15 results and the documentation is not there.

So we should probably keep the ul parameter in the new form when set in 
the query string but I don't understand why we don't have the doc 
results when ul is not there and I suspect the search should be global 
in this case.

Regards,

--
Guillaume