yeah, i know, but the hack require some changes to be following the 3.0.6 structure of codes... i know it's possible to install it...

what exactly happens when u try to use the installer ?

hum.. little request here...

vB 3.5 will have the FullText integration complete, is there a beta tester here that knows if THIS hack is the same as the one they will introduce in 3.5 or if it's a complete different story ?!

:)

Fulltext search is available in official vB release ever since version 3.0.2. Though it isn't supported - you have to know where to look to enable it.
Conceptually this hack should be very similar to vB's own implementation. Details will differ of course.
The point is, you can already have look at the official fulltext search code, and compare it to this hack.

... hum... you did not follow the topic, why do you answer this ?!...
and also, look at who you're talking to, you'll spare some words... (yes i'm the guy in perpetual bad mood)

And I can say only sorry :) I have never seen vb3 other then vb3.0.0 Gold and can't say something exactly...

Hello John...(Running 3.0.6 (this security updates applied.)

I have a question if I may. I see your full text search requires two different indexes in the post table. One is TITLE and the other is PAGETEXT (keynames). Looking at the structure for the POST table I see these two indexes with pagetext having a 1 after it.

Now looking at how Vb asked for it to be done, they want you to run...

ALTER TABLE post ADD FULLTEXT INDEX (title,pagetext);
ALTER TABLE thread ADD FULLTEXT INDEX (title);

This results, as you know, in a single new index in POST for TITLE that has both TITLE and PAGETEXT in one keyname. (title). Then they wanted another full text search index for the THREAD table for TITLE.

My questions, because I really do not know...

1) What is the difference having two keynames in the POST table, like yours, and only having one (theirs)? What does help with?

2) Does it matter, or will it help, with your code to have the full text search index in the THREAD table like they requested? (I made it just in case.)

I have your code now running on TiVo Community Forum and I am looking to run it on AVS Forum (Even though it is from last year, I hope the code is still ok with the current version Iam running). I am looking for solutions for we are getting killed with the searches more so on AVS Forum. (We went to VB3 last Sunday.)

Thank you for your time.

(Note...I noticed in the VB3 search.php it really needs help. Espically when you have it limite the return. It still searches and returns ALL HITS and then purnes it down to the limit number. Thus the return is still very large. I think your code actually does it correct by stopping when it reached the limit.)

Update...I just installed it on AVS Forum. It took my MySQL load from 1.4 (or more) to currently .38 with 2000 users on-line.

Just need to know why. :)

Hello Again...

Sad to see no answer to the above. So far the code seems to do very well. But still would love to know why it seems to have a lesswof an impact on MySQL vs what VB3 used.

Two indexes are required to search both title AND post text in default search mode.

Hello...

Yes, I do see that and have it that way and all is well.

But th questionis as to why. Just wondering what the difference is and why do it that way vs the way VB asked for it to be done. It is more affective? Do I still need the "ALTER TABLE thread ADD FULLTEXT INDEX (title);" as they request?

I guess I am seeking why this hack works so much better than the VB3 version of the Full Text Search.

Thank you.