Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Maybe that would be marginally better than classic Levenshtein
> distance, but I doubt it would pay for itself. It's just more code to
> maintain. Are we really expecting to not get the best possible
> suggestion due to some number of transposition errors very frequently?
> You still have to have a worse suggestion spuriously get ahead of
> yours, and typically there just aren't that many to begin with. I'm
> not targeting spelling errors so much as thinkos around plurals and
> whether or not an underscore was used. Damerau-Levenshtein seems like
> an algorithm with fairly specialized applications.
Yes, it's for typos. I guess it's an unfrequent scenario to have both a
typoed column and a column that's missing the plural declension, which
is the case in which Damerau-Lvsh would be a win.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services