| From: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jackson, DeJuan" <djackson(at)cpsgroup(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, jose(at)sferacarta(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] SQL92 |
| Date: | 1998-10-02 16:21:33 |
| Message-ID: | 3614FD8D.8F7C67AB@alumni.caltech.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > * add SIMILAR to allow character classes, 'pg_[a-c]%'
> So are we going to add the character class support to LIKE or SIMILAR
> or both? Just looking for clarification. Or are we going to use the
> regex code for both?
I would expect us to stay compatible with the standard for LIKE, and
perhaps have a superset of the SQL3 (draft) standard for SIMILAR. I'd
expect it to be a candidate for v6.5, or perhaps for v6.4.x.
But I'm not doing the work, and whoever does has a much stronger vote :)
- Tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-02 16:21:36 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch - please apply |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-02 16:17:05 | Re: SGI Port of Postgresql 6.4 snapshot of 09/28/98 |