Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8219F9A5B for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:43:39 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02426-02 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:43:32 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from smtp166.iad.emailsrvr.com (smtp166.iad.emailsrvr.com [207.97.245.166]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB069F9A72 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:43:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 450996AAA4F; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 01:43:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by relay6.relay.iad.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: erik-AT-myemma.com) with ESMTP id 1785D6AAA47; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 01:43:33 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <1595.1191383289@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <20071002202313.GB18506@nibiru.local> <51E80F93-35D0-41A0-B9C0-A256A806C971@myemma.com> <1595.1191383289@sss.pgh.pa.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <9F9943E3-5114-457A-ABE7-D41CBCAFFE93@myemma.com> Cc: weigelt@metux.de, pgsql-sql Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Erik Jones Subject: Re: Finding broken regex'es Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:43:16 -0500 To: Tom Lane X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200710/8 X-Sequence-Number: 29380 On Oct 2, 2007, at 10:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Erik Jones writes: >> IIRC, if they're PERL compatible which it would seem from the php >> function you're using, no. Postgres supports POSIX regexes but not >> (right now anyway) PERL regexes. > > Actually what we support are Tcl (Henry Spencer) regexes, which are > about as powerful as Perl's but have a few minor incompatibilities. > Tcl and Perl regexes are both supersets of the POSIX requirements. > Excellent point of information. I was really just trying to focus on =20= why the Postgres regex engine wouldn't be equivalent to the matching =20 functionality of php's preg_* functions. One example would be look =20 behind assertions. Btw, am I crazy or do I remember someone =20 mentioning that support for Perl regexes possibly being added to =20 Postgres in the future. Erik Jones Software Developer | Emma=AE erik@myemma.com 800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888 615.292.0777 (fax) Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style. Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com