| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jon Jensen <jon(at)endpoint(dot)com>, wade <wade(at)wavefire(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: POSIX regex performance bug in 7.3 Vs. 7.2 |
| Date: | 2003-02-04 19:36:45 |
| Message-ID: | 1044387405.6534.963.camel@tokyo |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 13:21, Tom Lane wrote:
> After some further research, pcre does seem like an interesting
> alternative. Both pcre and Spencer's new code have essentially
> Berkeley-style licenses, so there's no problem there.
Keep in mind that pcre has an advertising clause in its license
(software that distributes pcre commercially or non-commercially needs
to add a note to the effect in its documentation / online help). Since
PostgreSQL's license doesn't have this restriction, it would be shame to
impose that requirement on PostgreSQL users.
(Note that as I'm not a lawyer, my interpretation of the license may not
be correct.)
> Strict Perl compatibility would be a nice feature, but right at the
> moment the multibyte issue is looking like the determining factor.
Agreed -- ISTM that Spencer's new engine is probably the best choice.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Copeland | 2003-02-04 19:59:34 | Re: PGP signing releases |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-02-04 19:29:27 | Re: POSIX regex performance bug in 7.3 Vs. 7.2 |