Re: Pathological regexp match
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Pathological regexp match |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9837222c1002080515v5fee82baid8e88e9be0b457d4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Pathological regexp match (Michael Glaesemann <michael.glaesemann@myyearbook.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Pathological regexp match
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2010/2/1 Michael Glaesemann <michael.glaesemann@myyearbook.com>: > > On Jan 31, 2010, at 22:14 , Tom Lane wrote: > >> The Tcl folk accepted that patch, so I went ahead and applied it to >> our code. It would still be a good idea for us to do any testing we >> can on it, though. > > I applied the patch and ran both the test query I submitted as well as original problematic query that triggered the report,and it runs much faster. Thanks for the fix! I did the same, and it does not help in my case. FWIW, the regexp I'm matching is: <pre .*?>(.*?)</pre> (yes, the production system has already been fixed to use a smarter regexp that solves the same problem) The text is about 180Kb. PostgreSQL takes ~40 seconds without the patch, ~36 seconds with it, to extract the match from it. Perl takes 0.016 seconds. -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: