[holmberd]

Having implemented this for a client in the past I have to agree that it is a cheaper option than ElasticSearch, especially for smaller projects with a lower number of records to index.

ElastiSearch easily gets expensive and the search suggestion is pretty bad.

[threeseed]

What does this mean ?

ElasticSearch starts off as a small Java application that wraps the Lucene library.

Obviously heap will increase with usage and number of documents but I am still confused how it is in any way "expensive".

[pauloxnet]

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.

[pauloxnet]

Thanks for your feedback, I obviously agree with you, but I'm starting to plan to use PG FTS with Django also in some bigger project. I hope to write another article about it in new future.

[holmberd]

Depends on the data right. I've seen good performance on larger tables after using GIN indexing with records that rarely needs to be updated and simple queries. I'm not a expert in PostgreSQL by any means, but reducing cost and learning something never hurts.

[pauloxnet]

I totally agree with you