Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: like/ilike improvements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: andrew(at)supernews(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: like/ilike improvements
Date: 2007-05-23 14:41:09
Message-ID: 20530.1179931269@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> We should only be able to get out of step from the "%_" case, I believe, 
> so we should only need to do the first-byte test in that case (which is 
> in a different code path from the normal "_" case. Does that seem right?

At least put Assert(IsFirstByte()) in the main path.

I'm a bit suspicious of the separate-path business anyway.  Will it do
the right thing with say "%%%_" ?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-05-23 14:52:44
Subject: Re: like/ilike improvements
Previous:From: NikhilSDate: 2007-05-23 14:39:20
Subject: Re: CREATE TABLE LIKE INCLUDING INDEXES support

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-05-23 14:52:44
Subject: Re: like/ilike improvements
Previous:From: NikhilSDate: 2007-05-23 14:39:20
Subject: Re: CREATE TABLE LIKE INCLUDING INDEXES support

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group