Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4AD68565.2000001@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > >> David Fetter wrote: >> >>> Speaking of which, can we see about deprecating and removing this GUC? >>> I've yet to hear of anyone using a flavor other than the default. >>> > > >> You have now. I have a client who sadly uses a non-default setting. And >> on 8.4, what is more. >> > > How critical is it to them? It would be nice to get rid of that source > of variability. > > It would be possible to keep using old-style regexes even without the > GUC, if they can interpose anything that can stick an "embedded options" > prefix on the pattern strings. See 9.7.3.4: > http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/functions-matching.html > > > They are probably quite open to changing it, but IIRC it is a setting imposed by OpenACS, which is what they are based on. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: