SIMILAR TO doesn't implement the SQL standard, it's only a wrapper around
the POSIX regexp matching, which is wrong.  I thought someone wanted to
fix that, but if it's not happening it should be removed.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


Sat, 7 Sep 2002 18:15:44 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
SIMILAR TO
> SIMILAR TO doesn't implement the SQL standard, it's only a wrapper around
> the POSIX regexp matching, which is wrong.  I thought someone wanted to
> fix that, but if it's not happening it should be removed.

Please be specific on what you would consider correct. I'm not recalling
any details of past discussions so need some background.

I see mention in my SQL99 docs of escape characters for "similar
pattern" which would suggest that it resembles Posix regexp matching. I
don't have the code in front of me to check on the details of the
current implementation, but I'd hope that you have something helpful to
say on what a better implementation would be.

Regards.

                 - Tom

Sat, 07 Sep 2002 17:17:01 -0700
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@fourpalms.org>
Re: SIMILAR TO
Thomas Lockhart writes:

> > SIMILAR TO doesn't implement the SQL standard, it's only a wrapper around
> > the POSIX regexp matching, which is wrong.  I thought someone wanted to
> > fix that, but if it's not happening it should be removed.
>
> Please be specific on what you would consider correct. I'm not recalling
> any details of past discussions so need some background.

The pattern that should be accepted by SIMILAR TO (as defined in SQL99
part 2 clause 8.6) and the POSIX regular expressions that it accepts now
are not the same.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


Mon, 9 Sep 2002 20:41:19 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: SIMILAR TO

Is this a TODO?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Thomas Lockhart writes:
> 
> > > SIMILAR TO doesn't implement the SQL standard, it's only a wrapper around
> > > the POSIX regexp matching, which is wrong.  I thought someone wanted to
> > > fix that, but if it's not happening it should be removed.
> >
> > Please be specific on what you would consider correct. I'm not recalling
> > any details of past discussions so need some background.
> 
> The pattern that should be accepted by SIMILAR TO (as defined in SQL99
> part 2 clause 8.6) and the POSIX regular expressions that it accepts now
> are not the same.
> 
> -- 
> Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Wed, 11 Sep 2002 00:24:17 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: SIMILAR TO
Bruce Momjian writes:

> Is this a TODO?

It's a must-fix for 7.3, but frankly I don't see how we could justify
making the required extensive changes during beta.  I suggest that we keep
the parser support and throw an error when it's invoked.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:15:33 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: SIMILAR TO