From: | "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jim Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
Cc: | "postgres general" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: large document multiple regex |
Date: | 2007-02-02 17:00:27 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150702020900o25e1ed55t26e2331cb303ebf2@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2/1/07, Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> wrote:
> Have you thought about something like ~ '(first_string|second_string|
> third_string)'? Obviously your example would be more complex, but I
> believe that with careful crafting, you can get regex to do a lot
> without resorting to multiple passes.
that doesn't work...i researched the problem further and found that
postgresql regex implementation has the built in limitation to quit
scanning after the first matched group (this is noted in the
documentation). There is no way that I can see to extract two or more
non contiguous text chunks in a single regex.
To do it properly, you need to have the sophistication of perl regex
with it's magic variables.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bill Moran | 2007-02-02 17:03:47 | Re: Predicted lifespan of different PostgreSQL branches |
Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-02-02 16:51:56 | Re: Converting 7.x to 8.x |