mirror of
https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
synced 2024-12-03 08:00:21 +08:00
8f0ca623ff
inclusion in pgsql. I have included a README which should be enough to start using it, plus a BENCH file that describes some timings I have done. Please have a look at it, and if you think everything is OK, I would like it seen included in the contrib-section of pgsql. I don't think I will do any more work in this, but maybe it inspires somebody else to improve on it. Maarten Boekhold |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
BENCH | ||
fti.c | ||
Makefile | ||
README | ||
timings.sh |
An attempt at some sort of Full Text Indexing for PostgreSQL. The included software is an attempt to add some sort of Full Text Indexing support to PostgreSQL. I mean by this that we can ask questions like: Give me all rows that have 'still' and 'nash' in the 'artist' field. Ofcourse we can write this as: select * from cds where artist ~* 'stills' and artist ~* 'nash'; But this does not use any indices, and therefore, if your database gets very large, it will not have very high performance (the above query requires at least one sequential scan, it probably takes 2 due to the self-join). The approach used by this add-on is to define a trigger on the table and column you want to do this queries on. On every insert in the table, it takes the value in the specified column, breaks the text in this column up into pieces, and stores all sub-strings into another table, together with a reference to the row in the original table that contained this sub-string (it uses the oid of that row). By now creating an index over the 'fti-table', we can search for substrings that occur in the original table. By making a join between the fti-table and the orig-table, we can get the actual rows we want (this can also be done by using subselects, and maybe there're other ways too). As an example we take the previous query, where we assume we have all sub-strings in the table 'cds-fti': select c.* from cds c, cds-fti f1, cds-fti f2 where f1.string ~ '^stills' and f2.string ~ '^nash' and f1.id = c.oid and f2.id = c.oid ; We can use the ~ (case-sensitive regular expression) here, because of the way sub-strings are built: from right to left, ie. house -> 'se' + 'use' + 'ouse' + 'house'. If a ~ search starts with a ^ (match start of string), btree indices can be used by PostgreSQL. Now, how do we create the trigger that maintains the fti-table? First: the fti-table should have the following schema: create cds-fti ( string varchar(N), id oid ); Don't change the *names* of the columns, the varchar() can in fact also be of text-type. If you do use varchar, make sure the largest possible sub-string will fit. The create the function that contains the trigger:: create function fti() returns opaque as '/path/to/fti.so' language 'C'; And finally define the trigger on the 'cds' table: create trigger cds-fti-trigger after update or insert or delete on cds for each row execute procedure fti(cds-fti, artist); Here, the trigger will be defined on table 'cds', it will create sub-strings from the field 'artist', and it will place those sub-strings in the table 'cds-fti'. Now populate the table 'cds'. This will also populate the table 'cds-fti'. It's fastest to populate the table *before* you create the indices. Before you start using the system, you should at least have the following indices: create index cds-fti-idx on cds-fti (string, id); create index cds-oid-idx on cds (oid); To get the most performance out of this, you should have 'cds-fti' clustered on disk, ie. all rows with the same sub-strings should be close to each other. There are 3 ways of doing this: 1. After you have created the indices, execute 'cluster cds-fti-idx on cds-fti'. 2. Do a 'select * into tmp-table from cds-fti order by string' *before* you create the indices, then 'drop table cds-fti' and 'alter table tmp-table rename to cds-fti' 3. *Before* creating indices, dump the contents of the cds-fti table using 'pg_dump -a -t cds-fti dbase-name', remove the \connect from the beginning and the \. from the end, and sort it using the UNIX 'sort' program, and reload the data. Method 1 is very slow, 2 a lot faster, and for very large tables, 3 is preferred.