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

Re: UTF8MatchText

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UTF8MatchText
Date: 2007-05-20 22:43:37
Message-ID: 4650CF19.1040202@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>   
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>     
>>> On the strength of this analysis, shouldn't we drop the separate
>>> UTF8 match function and just use SB_MatchText for UTF8?
>>>       
>
>   
>> We still call NextChar() after "_", and I think we probably need to, 
>> don't we? If so we can't just marry the cases.
>>     
>
> Doh, you're right ... but on third thought, what happens with a pattern
> containing "%_"?  If % tries to advance bytewise then we'll be trying to
> apply NextChar in the middle of a data character, and bad things ensue.
>
> I think we need to go back to the scheme with SB_ and MB_ variants and
> no special case for UTF8.
>
> 			
>   

My head is spinning with all these variants. I'll look at ti tomorrow.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2007-05-21 00:07:10
Subject: Re: Re: [Oledb-dev] double precision error with pg linux server, but not with windows pg server
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-05-20 22:23:50
Subject: Re: UTF8MatchText

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: FAST PostgreSQLDate: 2007-05-21 01:22:21
Subject: Re: Updateable cursors patch
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-05-20 22:23:50
Subject: Re: UTF8MatchText

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