Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Changing the scope of the search on the basis of whether or not a
> pattern is present strikes me as a terrible idea. It's confusing and
> unlikely to make anyone happy.
Huh? The pattern itself "changes the scope of the search", so I don't
see how this is a conceptual violation.
Not that I'd personally be unhappy with dropping that part of the
proposal, but this doesn't seem like a good argument against it.
regards, tom lane