On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> The INSTR implementation in the docs will instead search backwards from the
> end of the string if you tell it to start at 0, same as if you gave it a
> negative input. I think it's therefore possible to get the plpgsql version
> to return
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I can confirm that Oracle returns 0 if the third argument to
>>> INSTR is 0.
>
>> Can someone provide a suitable doc patch?
Thanks, committed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Pos
Robert Haas wrote:
>> I can confirm that Oracle returns 0 if the third argument to
>> INSTR is 0.
> Can someone provide a suitable doc patch?
Here you are.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
instr-doc.patch
Description: instr-doc.patch
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
T
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> I can confirm that Oracle returns 0 if the third argument to
> INSTR is 0.
Can someone provide a suitable doc patch?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers maili
Greg Smith wrote:
> A web site doc comment from user skong today points out a small issue
> around the sample INSTR function given in plpgsql-porting.html that I
> can't confirm (none of those dirty Oracle instances here today), but
it
> sounds legit.
>
> A look at Oracle's documentation on the IN
A web site doc comment from user skong today points out a small issue
around the sample INSTR function given in plpgsql-porting.html that I
can't confirm (none of those dirty Oracle instances here today), but it
sounds legit.
A look at Oracle's documentation on the INSTR function at
http://do
