Hi Victor, > I like the idea and I think it's a great patch. However in current shape it > requires some amount of reworking to meet PostgreSQL standards of code > quality.
Also I would like to add that I agree with Thomas Munro: > Calling this search syntax just "query" seems too general and > overloaded. "Simple search", "simple query", "web search", "web > syntax", "web query", "Google-style query", "Poogle" (kidding!) ... > well I'm not sure, but I feel like it deserves a proper name. > websearch_to_tsquery()? websearch_to_tsquery() sounds much better than query_to_tsquery(). Also I agree Tomas Vondra in regard that: > 2) I don't think we should mention Google in the docs explicitly. Not > that I'm somehow anti-google, but this syntax was certainly not invented > by Google - I vividly remember using something like that on Altavista > (yeah, I'm old). And it's used by pretty much every other web search > engine out there ... I suggest to rephrase: ``` + about its input. <function>queryto_tsquery</function> provides a + different, Google like syntax to create tsquery. ``` .. to something more like "provides a different syntax, similar to one used in web search engines, to create tsqeury". And maybe give a few examples right in the next sentence. -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
