On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 05:15:07PM +0300, Aleksandr Parfenov wrote: > > In the current version of the patch, configurations written in old > syntax are rewritten into the same configuration in the new syntax. > Since new syntax doesn't support a TSL_FILTER, it was removed from the > documentation. It is possible to store configurations written in old > syntax in a special way and simulate a TSL_FILTER behavior for them. > But it will lead to maintenance of two different behavior of the FTS > depends on a version of the syntax used during configuration. Do you > think we should keep both behaviors?
Is I understood users need to rewrite their configurations if they use unaccent dictionary, for example. It is not good I think. Users will be upset about that if they use only old configuration and they don't need new configuration. >From my point of view it is necessary to keep old configuration syntax. > > Columns' 'dictionaries' and 'dictionary' type were changed to text > because after the patch the configuration may be not a plain array of > dictionaries but a complex expression tree. In the column > 'dictionaries' the result is textual representation of configuration > and it is the same as a result of \dF+ description of the configuration. Oh, I understood. > > I decide to rename newly added column to 'configuration' and keep > column 'dictionaries' with an array of all dictionaries used in > configuration (no matter how). Also, I fixed a bug in 'command' output > of the ts_debug in some cases. Maybe it would be better to keep the 'dictionary' column name? Is there a reason why it was renamed to 'command'? > > Additionally, I added some examples to documentation regarding > multilingual search and combination of exact and linguistic-aware > search and fixed typos. Great! -- Arthur Zakirov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com Russian Postgres Company
