From: | Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Markhof, Ingolf" <ingolf(dot)markhof(at)de(dot)verizon(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [E] Re: Regexp_replace bug / does not terminate on long strings |
Date: | 2021-08-23 14:21:37 |
Message-ID: | CA+bJJby_0WEtTAYy0aFRQtCdiEjbG77kVsuL7+rJ=N+DUfMFLQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Ingolf:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 2:39 PM Markhof, Ingolf
<ingolf(dot)markhof(at)de(dot)verizon(dot)com> wrote:
> Yes, When I use (\1)? instead of (\1)+, the expression is evaluated quickly, but it doesn't return what I want. Once a word is written, it is not subject to matching again. i.e.
> select regexp_replace( --> remove double entries
> 'one,one,one,two,two,three,three',
> '([^,]+)(,\1)?($|,)',
> '\1\3',
> 'g'
> ) as res;
>
...
> Honestly, this behaviour seems to be incorrect for me. Once the system replaces the first two 'one,one,' by a single 'one,', I'd expect to match this replaced one 'one,' with the next 'one,' following, replacing these two by another, single 'one,', again...
I think your expectation is misguided. All the regexp engines I've
used do it this way, when asked to match "g"lobally they do
non-overlapping matches, they do not substitute and recurse with the
modified string.
Also, your way opens the door to run-away or infinite loops (
rr('a','a','aa','g') or rr('a','a','a','g'), not to speak of
r('x','','','g') ). Even a misguided r(str, '_+','_','g'), used
sometimes to normalize space runs and similar things, can go into a
loop.
Francisco Olarte.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Markhof, Ingolf | 2021-08-23 14:29:23 | Re: [E] Re: Regexp_replace bug / does not terminate on long strings |
Previous Message | Oliver Kohll | 2021-08-23 13:16:40 | Re: Incremental Materialized Views |