Postgres full-text search is good enough
blog.lostpropertyhq.com
Postgres full-text search is good enough
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#2I've used tsearch2 on several projects and it's always been super handy. It's much easier than adding another dependency just to support search.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#3Link to previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8381748
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#4The use of a Materialized View here is clever, but it means that every time you add a new row you have to refresh the view. For an app that accepts user-generated content, this would be very frequent since you wouldn't want users to create content and then test the search and not find it.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#5I've used tsearch2 on several projects and it's always been super handy. It's much easier than adding another dependency just to support search.
In case anyone ends up confused by the parent post, tsearch2 is not an additional Postgres contrib module; rather, it's an old contrib module that the built-in full text search features were built on top of. It has been obsolete forever.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#6I think Algolia is also a nice alternative if you're looking for a quick setup.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#7I've actually tried both Postgres FTS and Elasticsearch(in conjunction with a Postgres DB) and found Elasticsearch easier for search. It's much more robust - for my specific case I needed a bunch of Japanese text to be searchable alongside english text; Postgres has very poor support for this - and its API is excellent and its very quick and painless to set up(documentation is not stellar though). You don't have to worry about things like vectors or indices with ES, you can just put the data in and it will be easily searchable, and it's miles more efficient when searching across large data sets. It Java-based so it is a pretty big resource hog though, so I can see the advantage of someone who just needed very lightweight search for their project using tsearch.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#8no_future (dead) says:
I've actually tried both Postgres FTS and Elasticsearch(in conjunction with a Postgres DB) and found Elasticsearch easier for search. It's much more robust - for my specific case I needed a bunch of Japanese text to be searchable alongside english text; Postgres has very poor support for this - and its API is excellent and its very quick and painless to set up(documentation is not stellar though). You don't have to worry about things like vectors or indices with ES, you can just put the data in and it will be easily searchable, and it's miles more efficient when searching across large data sets. It Java-based so it is a pretty big resource hog though, so I can see the advantage of someone who just needed very lightweight search for their project using tsearch.
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#9no_future (dead) says: I've actually tried both Postgres FTS and Elasticsearch(in conjunction with a Postgres DB) and found Elasticsearch easier for search. It's much more robust - for my specific case I needed a bunch of Japanese text to be searchable alongside english text; Postgres has very poor support for this - and its API is excellent and its very quick and painless to set up(documentation is not stellar thoug…
[deleted]
Re: Postgres full-text search is good enough
#10It may be good enough but I find ElasticSearch just easier to work with. For example, ElasticSearch gives you query string syntax [1] for free and it's a HUGE plus. It's both user friendly and extremely powerful. You can see it in action over at GitHub's Code Search [2].
[1] http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/referenc...