Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Maybe that would be marginally better than classic Levenshtein > distance, but I doubt it would pay for itself. It's just more code to > maintain. Are we really expecting to not get the best possible > suggestion due to some number of transposition errors very frequently? > You still have to have a worse suggestion spuriously get ahead of > yours, and typically there just aren't that many to begin with. I'm > not targeting spelling errors so much as thinkos around plurals and > whether or not an underscore was used. Damerau-Levenshtein seems like > an algorithm with fairly specialized applications.
Yes, it's for typos. I guess it's an unfrequent scenario to have both a typoed column and a column that's missing the plural declension, which is the case in which Damerau-Lvsh would be a win. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
