From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: UTF8MatchText |
Date: | 2007-05-20 22:43:37 |
Message-ID: | 4650CF19.1040202@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> On the strength of this analysis, shouldn't we drop the separate
>>> UTF8 match function and just use SB_MatchText for UTF8?
>>>
>
>
>> We still call NextChar() after "_", and I think we probably need to,
>> don't we? If so we can't just marry the cases.
>>
>
> Doh, you're right ... but on third thought, what happens with a pattern
> containing "%_"? If % tries to advance bytewise then we'll be trying to
> apply NextChar in the middle of a data character, and bad things ensue.
>
> I think we need to go back to the scheme with SB_ and MB_ variants and
> no special case for UTF8.
>
>
>
My head is spinning with all these variants. I'll look at ti tomorrow.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-21 00:07:10 | Re: Re: [Oledb-dev] double precision error with pg linux server, but not with windows pg server |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-20 22:23:50 | Re: UTF8MatchText |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | FAST PostgreSQL | 2007-05-21 01:22:21 | Re: Updateable cursors patch |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-20 22:23:50 | Re: UTF8MatchText |