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


From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ILIKE
Date: 2003-02-24 04:31:22
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> - Some other databases support ILIKE and it makes porting easier.

Which other ones?  I checked our archives and found that when we were
discussing adding ILIKE, it was claimed that Oracle had it.  But I can't
find anything on the net to verify that claim.  I did find that mSQL
(not MySQL) had it, as far back as 1996.  Nothing else seems to --- but
Google did provide a lot of hits on pages saying that ILIKE is a mighty
handy Postgres-ism ;-)

> Why this sudden urge to prune away perfectly useful operators?

My feeling too.  Whatever you may think of its usefulness, it's been a
documented feature since 7.1.  It's a bit late to reconsider.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: ILIKE at 2003-02-23 21:02:27 from Josh Berkus


  • Re: ILIKE at 2003-02-24 12:04:46 from Rod Taylor
  • Re: ILIKE at 2003-02-24 12:32:44 from Peter Eisentraut

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: John CochranDate: 2003-02-24 06:23:52
Subject: Re: regression failure - horology
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2003-02-24 03:29:22
Subject: Re: Loss of cluster status

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group