Ah. I see. Thanks for the clarification. __________________________________________________________________________________ *Mike Blackwell | Technical Analyst, Distribution Services/Rollout Management | RR Donnelley* 1750 Wallace Ave | St Charles, IL 60174-3401 Office: 630.313.7818 mike.blackw...@rrd.com http://www.rrdonnelley.com
<http://www.rrdonnelley.com/> * <mike.blackw...@rrd.com>* On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Bruno Harbulot <br...@distributedmatter.net > wrote: > > > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Mike Blackwell <mike.blackw...@rrd.com> writes: >> > See for example >> > http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/text.102/b14218/cqoper.htm#i997330, >> > Table 3-1, third row, showing the precedence of '?'. Further down the >> > page, under "Fuzzy" see "Backward Compatibility Syntax". >> >> If I'm reading that right, that isn't a SQL-level operator but an operator >> in their text search query language, which would only appear in SQL >> queries within string literals (compare tsquery's query operators in PG). >> So it wouldn't be a hazard for ?-substitution, as long as the substituter >> was bright enough to not change string literals. >> >> regards, tom lane >> > > That's how I read it too. I've tried this little test: > http://sqlfiddle.com/#!4/7436b/4/0 > > CREATE TABLE test_table ( > id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, > name VARCHAR(100) > ); > > INSERT INTO test_table (id, name) VALUES (1, 'Nicole'); > INSERT INTO test_table (id, name) VALUES (2, 'Nicholas'); > INSERT INTO test_table (id, name) VALUES (3, 'Robert'); > INSERT INTO test_table (id, name) VALUES (4, 'Michael'); > INSERT INTO test_table (id, name) VALUES (5, 'Nicola'); > > CREATE INDEX idx_test_table_name ON test_table(name) INDEXTYPE IS > CTXSYS.CONTEXT; > > SELECT * FROM test_table WHERE CONTAINS(name, '?Nicolas', 1) > 0; > > > Fuzzy matching works indeed, but the question mark is part of the literal > (similarly to % when using LIKE). > > Best wishes, > > Bruno. > >
