Re: Pathological regexp match

From: Michael Glaesemann <michael(dot)glaesemann(at)myyearbook(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Pathological regexp match
Date: 2010-01-29 03:37:39
Message-ID: B53EF768-0C04-4D75-BE6A-1BC2934E0500@myyearbook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Jan 28, 2010, at 21:59 , Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>> We came across a regexp that takes very much longer than expected.
>>
>> PostgreSQL 8.4.1 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc
>> (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-44), 64-bit
>>
>> SELECT 'ooo...' ~ $r$Z(Q)[^Q]*A.*?(\1)$r$; -- omitted for email
>> brevity
>
> The ? after .* is pointless.

Interesting. I would expect that *? would be the non-greedy version of
*, meaning match up to the first \1 (in this case the first Q
following A), rather than as much as possible.

For example, in Perl:
$ perl -e " if ('oooZQoooAoooQooQooQooo' =~ /Z(Q)[^Q]*A.*(\1)/)
{ print \$&; } else { print 'NO'; }" && echo
ZQoooAoooQooQooQ
$ perl -e " if ('oooZQoooAoooQooQooQooo' =~ /Z(Q)[^Q]*A.*?(\1)/)
{ print \$&; } else { print 'NO'; }" && echo
ZQoooAoooQ

If I'm reading the docs right, Postgres does support non-greedy * as *?:

<http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/functions-matching.html#POSIX-QUANTIFIERS-TABLE
>

However, as you point out, Postgres doesn't appear to take this into
account:

postgres=# select regexp_replace('oooZQoooAoooQooQooQooo', $r$(Z(Q)
[^Q]*A.*(\2))$r$, $s$X$s$);
regexp_replace
----------------
oooXooo
(1 row)

postgres=# select regexp_replace('oooZQoooAoooQooQooQooo', $r$(Z(Q)
[^Q]*A.*?(\2))$r$, $s$X$s$);
regexp_replace
----------------
oooXooo
(1 row)

Michael Glaesemann
michael(dot)glaesemann(at)myyearbook(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2010-01-29 03:58:46 Re: Pathological regexp match
Previous Message KaiGai Kohei 2010-01-29 03:02:22 Re: [BUG?] strange behavior in ALTER TABLE ... RENAME TO on inherited columns