Re: psql/pg_dump vs. dollar signs in identifiers
От | Gregory Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psql/pg_dump vs. dollar signs in identifiers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87fy3xa1xw.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | psql/pg_dump vs. dollar signs in identifiers (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: psql/pg_dump vs. dollar signs in identifiers
Re: psql/pg_dump vs. dollar signs in identifiers |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > Now, because we surround the pattern with ^...$ anyway, I can't offhand > see a use-case for putting $ with its regexp meaning into the pattern. It's possible to still usefully use $ in the regexp, but it's existence at the end means there should always be a way to write the regexp without needing another one inside. Incidentally, are these really regexps? I always thought they were globs. And experiments seem to back up my memory: postgres=# \d foo* Table "public.foo^bar"Column | Type | Modifiers --------+---------+-----------i | integer | postgres=# \d foo.* Did not find any relation named "foo.*". > Comments? The first half of the logic applies to ^ as well. There's no use case for regexps using ^ inside. You would have to use quotes to create the table but we could have \d foo^* work: postgres=# \d foo^* Did not find any relation named "foo^*". -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: