Re: BUG #8679: Error in regex function - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #8679: Error in regex function
Date
Msg-id 24994.1386956430@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to BUG #8679: Error in regex function  (spmpro@pochta.ru)
Responses Re: BUG #8679: Error in regex function  ("Erik Rijkers" <er@xs4all.nl>)
List pgsql-bugs
spmpro@pochta.ru writes:
> May be, regex construction (?<=\pattern\) is not support?

It is not.  What we support is documented at
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/functions-matching.html#FUNCTIONS-POSIX-REGEXP

I have no idea what "(?<=" is supposed to mean --- it's not a standard
regexp construct, for sure.  In general, "(?" is used to introduce
non-POSIX extensions that are specific to particular regexp
implementations.  There's some commonality there, but you should never
assume that such things are portable.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: anitchakkarwar@gmail.com
Date:
Subject: BUG #8681: column 'n_tup_del' of pg_stat_user_tables doesn't change in case of truncate
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #8681: column 'n_tup_del' of pg_stat_user_tables doesn't change in case of truncate