No, the first X aren't more important, but being able to determine
word proximity is very important for partial phrase matching and
ranking. The closer the words, the "better" the match, all else being
equal.
exactly
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
Hi,
Mike Rylander wrote:
No, the first X aren't more important, but being able to determine
word proximity is very important for partial phrase matching and
ranking. The closer the words, the "better" the match, all else being
equal.
Ah, yeah, for word-pairs, that certainly helps.
Thanks.
Re
On 2/22/07, Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Teodor,
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> byte offset of word is useless for ranking purpose
Why is a word number more meaningful for ranking? Are the first 100
words more important than the rest? That seems as ambiguous as saying
the first
Hello Teodor,
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
byte offset of word is useless for ranking purpose
Why is a word number more meaningful for ranking? Are the first 100
words more important than the rest? That seems as ambiguous as saying
the first 1000 bytes are more important, no?
Or does the ranking w
Huh? I explicitly *want* positional information. But I find the word
number to be less useful than a character number or a simple (byte)
pointer to the position of the word in the string.
Given only the word number, I have to go and parse the string again.
byte offset of word is useless for r
Hi,
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
Word number is used only in ranking functions. If you don't need a
ranking than you could safely strip positional information.
Huh? I explicitly *want* positional information. But I find the word
number to be less useful than a character number or a simple (byte)
poi
to_tsvector() could as well return the character number or a byte
pointer, I could see advantages for both. But the word number makes
little sense to me.
Word number is used only in ranking functions. If you don't need a ranking than
you could safely strip positional information.
--
Teodor
Hi,
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
I'm fiddling with to_tsvector() and parse() from tsearch2, trying to
get the word position from those functions. I'd like to use the
tsearch2 parser and stemmer, but I need to know the exact position of
the word as well as the original, unstemmed word.
It's not suppo
Hello Teodor,
Teodor Sigaev wrote:
It's not supposed usage... Why do you need that?
Well, long story... I'm still using my own indexing on top of the
tsearch2 parsers and stemming.
However, two obvious cases come to mind:
- autocompletion, where I want to give the user one of the possible
I'm fiddling with to_tsvector() and parse() from tsearch2, trying to get
the word position from those functions. I'd like to use the tsearch2
parser and stemmer, but I need to know the exact position of the word as
well as the original, unstemmed word.
It's not supposed usage... Why do you nee
Hi,
I'm fiddling with to_tsvector() and parse() from tsearch2, trying to get
the word position from those functions. I'd like to use the tsearch2
parser and stemmer, but I need to know the exact position of the word as
well as the original, unstemmed word.
What I came up with so far is prett
11 matches
Mail list logo
