|
|
|
SSC Eights!
 
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 07, 2012 6:13 PM
Points: 956,
Visits: 2,845
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grasshopper
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:07 PM
Points: 19,
Visits: 82
|
|
Does this make sense. Why would you not use the built in full text search. Its good enough to power sharepoints document search. its built in from 2005 on and can easily index any text field.
|
|
|
|
|
SSC Eights!
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:54 AM
Points: 928,
Visits: 3,198
|
|
| I agree with Kermit--does this technique offer any benefits over just using full-text search? You can even get SQL Express with full-text search capabilities now!
|
|
|
|
|
SSCertifiable
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 1:09 PM
Points: 7,649,
Visits: 4,713
|
|
KermitTheRock (2/28/2011)
Does this make sense. Why would you not use the built in full text search. Its good enough to power sharepoints document search. its built in from 2005 on and can easily index any text field.
My thoughts exactly, why re-invent the wheel if full text search is readily available?
Why so serious?
How to post forum questions.
Need an answer? No, you need a question.
Interested in Data Mining? Visit the new data mining forum here at SQLServerCentral!
Member of LinkedIn.
MCTS³, MCITP, MCC
|
|
|
|
|
Grasshopper
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, February 27, 2012 4:22 PM
Points: 14,
Visits: 39
|
|
| All this have sense if your are going to search in non English text, or in the text with mixed language's words, and whant to support your own search rules: for example if you need to support synonyms: Baltic, Boltic, Boltik, Baltijske..
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Enthusiastic
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 7:47 AM
Points: 157,
Visits: 994
|
|
Hi
Please include a link to where Jeff Moden posted his function.
This search turned up this result.
Is that where you got the function from?
Thanks
Andrew
|
|
|
|
|
One Orange Chip
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:24 AM
Points: 29,755,
Visits: 23,412
|
|
AndrewJacksonZA (2/28/2011)
Hi Please include a link to where Jeff Moden posted his function. This search turned up this result. Is that where you got the function from? Thanks Andrew
That's likely it. I've only posted it a couple of times so far. As I said in the post, I'm still doing some testing on it for a couple of things including a performance curve in different environments.
--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
For better, quicker answers on T-SQL questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
For better answers on performance questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQLServerCentral/66909/
|
|
|
|
|
One Orange Chip
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:24 AM
Points: 29,755,
Visits: 23,412
|
|
I was going to post that the result table and the related methods for this code article are nearly identical to what full-text-search (FTS) does but I see that folks beat me to it. 
I've not worked with FTS before so I don't know if this article brings anything extra to the table (yet) and I haven't tested the code in this article (yet) BUT... the article appears to be a reasonable study of how FTS may work behind the scenes to build the "index table" and how it uses special tables for "noise words", etc.
Why is that good? Heh... because SQL Server isn't the only database in town.  This article shows how it could be done either in other database engines which may not have an FTS capability or in a "custom database".
--Jeff Moden
"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."
For better, quicker answers on T-SQL questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/
For better answers on performance questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQLServerCentral/66909/
|
|
|
|
|
SSC-Enthusiastic
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 7:47 AM
Points: 157,
Visits: 994
|
|
| Or in a lower, cheaper edition.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, May 08, 2011 9:49 AM
Points: 9,
Visits: 36
|
|
I've been using FTS on a view composed of several tables, and this method works pretty well, as I can return ranked results using "contains table". Not sure if the method above allows for ranked results?
Also, you don't mention what happens if someone searches for "Hex Nuts" as opposed to "Hex Nut"...how do you account for that? I've resorted to stemming the search terms when the last characters are "s", "es", etc.
Does anyone have any links for "predictive" search solutions in MSSQL, to catch misspellings, etc?
|
|
|
|
