Beena Emerson
memis****@gmail*****
2013年 10月 3日 (木) 17:47:30 JST
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Fujii Masao <masao****@gmail*****> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Beena Emerson <memis****@gmail*****> > wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Fujii Masao <masao****@gmail*****> > wrote: > >> > >> Hmm... I was not able to reproduce this problem. I renamed cnt_bigm_sml > to > >> cnt_sml in the patch you had submitted, applied it to HEAD of pg_bigm, > and > >> executed similarity('wow', 'wow'). Its result was 1. > > > > > > Even I tried after changing cnt_bigm_cml to cnt_sml in my patch but I got > > wrong result: > > > > test_db=# CREATE EXTENSION pg_trgm ; > > CREATE EXTENSION > > test_db=# CREATE EXTENSION pg_bigm; > > CREATE EXTENSION > > test_db=# SELECT similarity('wow','wow'); > > similarity > > ------------ > > 0 > > (1 row) > > > > I wonder if I am doing something wrong. I will look into this again and > let > > you know soon. > > I did something wrong. I could reproduce the problem.... :( > Ok. The pg_trgm.sql file was not included because an update would cause problems in previous versions. But I feel we might be able to handle this by having special pg_trgm test files for different versions so that new trgm functions are only tested in the newer versions of PostgreSQL. What do you think? If you feel this will complicate things then I am ok with not including the trgm tests, but then we should ensure that the function names are not repeated. Beena Emerson -------------- next part -------------- HTML$B$NE:IU%U%!%$%k$rJ]4I$7$^$7$?(B...Download
Fork