Re: SOUNDEX call

Il giorno 08/feb/2012, alle ore 11:25, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> ha scritto:

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 01:17, 84.le0n <84.le0n@gmail.com> wrote:

This is a bit ugly, but you could write the function yourself in the

PL/pgSQL procedural language, which is enabled by default in Postgres

9.0+. Of course this would be slower.

You answered yourself, this would be slower, I'll not do this.

How are you actually using soundex() in queries? If you just call it
once or twice with short keywords, it probably won't make a noticeable
difference. And you would gain a lot in compatibility (it will take
ages for hosting providers to upgrade to 9.3).

If you have queries like
WHERE soundex(somecolumn)=soundex('foobar')
then creating an index over (soundex(somecolumn)) would remove most of
the function overhead.

You can provide the PL/pgSQL function by default as a fallback, and if
it turns out to be too slow for some users, you can tell them to
enable the fuzzystrmatch extension optionally. Make it work first,
then make it fast.

Can I hope on SOUNDEX inclusion inside core for next release, as is

for other major databases ?

Unfortunately the chances are pretty slim, the last CommitFest for

PostgreSQL 9.2 closed mid-January.

When will be next?

Don't count on this. 9.3 will be released no earlier than 2013 June.
And it's not certain that making it a core function will be accepted
either.