pauloxnet

Thank to add this point of view about children. It's something I haven't though about but make totally sense.

Actually in the article I proposed only to think to people that don't know English but want to be part of the community. I think accessibility increase if more people can contribute.

Thanks a lot for sharing your experience it's really great to learn more about FLOSS and its community.

Thanks a lot for your feedback.

> More simplified English might be a good idea. There is what is called Simplified Technical English, but that seems to be for aerospace, and perhaps it could be adapted for computer documentation, too.

I'm happy that you think that the idea in the article is good.

I didn't know about the "Simplified Technical English" it seems interesting.

Thanks a lot for you feedback and point of view it's very useful for me.

I reply below to some points but only to share better my point of view I tried to wrote in the article.

> I'm not sure if more linguistic diversity will help FLOSS.

I think linguistic diversity in FLOSS means a more accessible FLOSS world to people that not speak English.

> For countries with more English speakers (e.g. most European countries) I don't think translations provided to developers will prove beneficial.

But here in Europe (I'm from Italy) not all country have the same level English skills. I also wrote the article thinking to the whole World with so meny country with a low level of instruction.

> The language-mastery issue is real, especially for very young people, but I'm not sure if "forcing" people isn't the better call.

I don't think in the article I wrote about forcing people.

> The suggestions for more simplified English in the article seem like good ideas to me.

Thanks, I'm happy you found the idea good.

Unfortunately it is not like that. We experienced various difficulties translating only few sections in the Django documentation because, also for technical text, mechanical translation is not effective, but you have to adapt the text.

Hi, thanks for your feedback. My suggestion in the article was more to take care of all people in the community than to translate everything. Starting to use a better/simpler English would be a great starting point.

Hi @BerislavLopac, I'm Paolo Melchiorre the author of the article, and thanks for sharing

> Not including Zstandard is a lost opportunity -- it is far more appropriate than XZ or LZMA for real-time applications like serving web pages.

The article is about offline creation of compressed data dumps and not about real-time application.

The Django code here use only compression algorithms already present in the Python standard library to avoid unnecessary dependencies.

Exactly. I replied also before reading you answer.

The Django code use only compression algorithms already included in the Python standard library to avoid unnecessary dependencies.

You're totally right. But you can choose also to use xz or bz2 for smaller files if you have spare cpu/memory.

You're welcome! I found it very helpful for me and than I shared it.

"I think at his core, Guido is a person who is trying to help make the world better in his own way. I think that was his philosophy when he started programming in Python and mentoring women is just another way that he contributes." -- Sushma Yadlapalli about Guido van Rossum

I wrote this solution the first time as an answer to a question on Stack Overflow.

https://stackoverflow.com/a/50134728/755343

Thank you!

I updated markers as you suggested, thanks again http://www.paulox.net/2017/12/22/full-text-search-in-django-...

In my article the "document" contain data from different table and i stored it in specific column and it's very fast with a GIN index on it.

I'm sorry but "complex search" is too generic. I can say that in my project the PG FTS is quite fast but a lot less complex than ES

Thanks for your link. I read about Postgrest months ago and I think is a good software. I think Django is good for some problem and postgrest for other.

BTW I migrated the djangoproject.com from ES to PG FTS and it works great https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/commit/1be9a483f...

I'll write another article about it and, if they vote it, I'll have a talk about it in the next PyCon Nove conference http://www.paulox.net/talks/#pycon-nove

I think it depends on your specific situation and your project requirements. In my project for example I had exactly the search quality I need with Django and PostgreSQL without installing another software (Elastic), using a different query syntax, synchronizing the data and installing another layer (haystack).

Maybe in other project ES will be a better solutions.

You are right

If your "document" is based also on columns on other table, as in the example on my article, you can't have a GIN index on your expression, but you can have a GIN index on your specified column.

PG FTS support other languages https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/textsearch-ps... Anyway the point of my article is not that PG FST is better than ES, but that for a quite good and fast FTS function you can use only Django and PostgreSQL and most of the time you don't need all the other ES features and at the same time your stack will be easier to build and maintain.

But in many situation you don't need all the ES features and you can implement a quite good and fast FTS function directly with your PostgreSQL database if you already use it in your stack.

The stack I proposed in my article is pretty simple: Django + PostgreSQL (DB + FTS).

In other project I used Elastic for the search function: Django + PostgreSQL (DB) + Haystack + ES (FTS).

Is obvious that the second solution is more expensive.

I don't the sense of the article is that PG FTS is better than ES , but in some situation, as the one I illustrated in my article, you can implement a the same search function with both of them, but with if have PG already in your stack configuring and using it with Django is very simple and convenient.

This is true.

Thanks for your reply , my opinion is th same