Possibly moving to InnoDB

Bradley Baetz bbaetz at acm.org
Tue Aug 8 07:59:59 UTC 2006

On 08/08/06, Myk Melez <myk at mozilla.org> wrote:
>  Right.  One way to do this would be to duplicate both summary and comment
> data in a separate table specifically designed for fulltext indexing, so
> that both bugs and longdescs can get transactions and referential integrity,
> i.e.:

Or we could use a database that doesn't suck.

> The other advantage to this approach is that it
> resolves a longstanding problem with our fulltext indexes (because of
> MySQL's inability to include columns from different tables in a fulltext
> index) that reduces their utility (even with our hacks to partially work
> around the problem).

Or we could... :)

>  Otherwise, we could roll our own fulltext engine or use something like
> Senna.

I don't really think we want to go down that path. Postgres has one,
oracle has one, mysql has one. The different syntax issues only
happens when doing 'complicated' stuff - simple 'find word in
substring' can just be handled by bugzilla. If a user tries multiple
fulltext queries, and the backend db doesn't support them, we can't

(Note that postgres' tsearch2 is actually implented via a separate
table and triggers. Thats a bit ugly, but we don't have to care - it
Just Works)


More information about the developers mailing list