Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS
Date: 2025-09-12 23:34:08
Message-ID: 2c58dcdba889f5b28df5ad9d21b5ea2d0ac63a9a.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, 2025-09-12 at 10:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > > This DOES look like a bug, no? I've done regexes for a long time,
> > > and these two forms should be equivalent IMHO. --DD
>
> Yeah, I agree it's busted.  You can use EXPLAIN VERBOSE to see the
> translated-to-POSIX pattern, and it's wrong:
>
> regression=# explain verbose with t(v) as (values ('foo:bar'), ('foo/bar'), ('foo0bar'))                                        
> select v from t where v similar to 'foo[\d\w]_%';
>                           QUERY PLAN                         
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>  Values Scan on "*VALUES*"  (cost=0.00..0.05 rows=1 width=32)
>    Output: "*VALUES*".column1
>    Filter: ("*VALUES*".column1 ~ '^(?:foo[\d\w]_%)$'::text)
> (3 rows)
>
> The _ and % are not getting converted to their POSIX equivalents
> ("." and ".*").

Indeed, and I have to take the blame for introducing a bug in a minor
release :^(

The attached patch should fix the problem.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Amend-recent-fix-for-SIMILAR-TO-regex-conversion.patch text/x-patch 3.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-09-13 00:12:03 Re: Latest patches break one of our unit-test, related to RLS
Previous Message Ellen Allhatatlan 2025-09-12 19:16:51 Re: MVCC and all that...