minimum word length in search
 

I like the way that 3.6.6+ now tells you why it hasn't found any search results (because of the minimum word length)

However I dislike the way it doesn't search if only one term is under the minimum.

Eg: If I search for Admin login as user it won't go ahead with the search because the word as is there.

I think it should complete the search however on the results page it should tell you the following words were not included in your search.

Distance

I definitely agree with this one, not as just a feedback for this site...but for vb in general.

You need to post such a suggestion on vb.com, not here.

Yeah I have done. It will be a while till they release the next version though. Unless there is another exploit. Especially after the ordeal of the last 3 released lol

Okay, I posted it over there but why not change your settings here to 2 but still have the mysql field set to 3.

That way people won't get errors when searching but it won't bring back all the results for two lettered words either :)

Distance

The minimum word length is a MySQL setting, and rebuilding the searchindexes with a different length would mean that all our forums would be down for many hours.

I don't see this changed in the near future.

This is not a mysql problem. It's a vb problem. The problem being stated is that if any word in a phrase is below the minimum word length no results are returned. So, if I search for 'Login as User' I get nothing, because 'as' is too short.

This can be dealt with by removing the 'as' before even sending the query, and displaying in the search results that the 'as' was removed due to being below the minimum word length. It's a bug, flat out.

If it is a bug or not i don't know. But feel free to post it in either the bug tracker or the suggestions forum at vb.com.

I believe the original poster did so. I just wanted to call attention to it, because there is a common request for a change to minimum search length that gets the 'that is just how mysql works' canned response (which it should), and that was the response this was getting here - whereas it's really a different issue. That's all, thanks :)

I've seen this hack on a vBulletin before, trying to work out how they did it :p.