Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:39:52PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:03:45AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:17:46AM -0500, Don Isgitt wrote:
Thanks, Tom. Interestingly enough, neither my original query or your
correct
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:39:52PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:03:45AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:17:46AM -0500, Don Isgitt wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks, Tom. Interestingly enough, neither my original query or your
> > > corrected one retur
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:03:45AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:17:46AM -0500, Don Isgitt wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Tom. Interestingly enough, neither my original query or your
> > corrected one returns anything with pg 7.4--another good reason to
> > upgrade to 8.*
>
> H
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 11:17:46AM -0500, Don Isgitt wrote:
>
> Thanks, Tom. Interestingly enough, neither my original query or your
> corrected one returns anything with pg 7.4--another good reason to
> upgrade to 8.*
Hmmm...for me both queries give the results shown if I run them in
7.3.9, 7.4
Tom Lane wrote:
Don Isgitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
gds2=# select substring('NE NE SE 2310 FSL 330 FEL' from '^([A-Z][A-Z] )+');
substring
---
SE
(1 row)
The pg docs say that this form of substring uses POSIX re's, and my
understanding of POSIX re's is they are always greedy
Don Isgitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> gds2=# select substring('NE NE SE 2310 FSL 330 FEL' from '^([A-Z][A-Z] )+');
> substring
> ---
> SE
> (1 row)
> The pg docs say that this form of substring uses POSIX re's, and my
> understanding of POSIX re's is they are always greedy. So, why d
