On Tue, 2025-05-27 at 10:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> > On Tue, 2025-05-27 at 14:57 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > With some tweaks and the tests reworked, I am finishing with the
> > > reviewed version attached. What do you think?
>
> > Thank you; I think that is good to go.
>
> Code changes look good, but I think the test cases are too cute:
>
> +EXPLAIN (VERBOSE, COSTS OFF) SELECT (SELECT '') SIMILAR TO '_[_[:alpha:]_]_';
> + QUERY PLAN
> +---------------------------------------------------------------
> + Result
> + Output: ((InitPlan 1).col1 ~ '^(?:.[_[:alpha:]_].)$'::text)
> + InitPlan 1
> + -> Result
> + Output: ''::text
> +(5 rows)
>
> This will break whenever somebody decides it's worth optimizing
> a sub-select that looks like that. I'd suggest following the
> pattern
>
> explain (costs off) select * from text_tbl where f1 similar to 'z';
> QUERY PLAN
> ----------------------------------
> Seq Scan on text_tbl
> Filter: (f1 ~ '^(?:z)$'::text)
> (2 rows)
>
> which is both less noisy and less likely to change in future.
That's a good point.
I originally considered EXPLAIN (GENERIC_PLAN), but that would only
backpatch so far.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
