Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:26:20 12/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2005 at 14:52:03, Dadi Jonsson wrote: >On December 09, 2005 at 13:28:01, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>I tried several searches for things that I knew were there and all of them >>failed. > >Search behaviour is not dictated by the forum software itself, but by the >underlying databse functionality. The search as it is currently set up uses a >"fulltext" index as the database vendor calls it. As a result searches are quite >fast, considering the amount of data. Fulltext search looks for words, which may >contain digits and underscore, but not special characters (including '.'). The >administrator of the forum can change the search method (simple checkbox >setting) to search for any character combination, but it is slower, probably >much slower in such a big table as the one with the text of almost 500.000 >messages from CCC. > >> The same searches would have worked on the old CCC archives. > >I decided to stick to the faster search and therefore you cannot search for >something like "WAC.230". > >I actually tried your "WAC.230" search in the old archives and the response was: > >"Couldn't find any matches for the expression". > >You can, however, search for such terms in the subject text. Is that what you >were referring to when you said that such searches worked on the old archives? > >I hope that you now have a better understanding of the available search options >and why I went for fulltext searches. I would be interesting to know if all your >failed searches involved expressions that fulltext search doesn't index. If not, >then examples would be appreciated. Probably, I just don't understand the query nomenclature for your site. I can easily find WAC 230 posts on the CCC archive. Probably, the query language is simply not clear to me for the new site.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.