Re: \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...
Дата
Msg-id 8521.1079392233@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...  (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>)
Ответы Re: \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...  (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes:
> I haven't looked in great detail into why this is happpening, but it
> seems as though processNamePattern() doesn't handle ?'s correctly in
> the negative lookahead context correctly.

Negative lookahead context!?  You are several sigmas beyond the subset
of regex functionality that \d and friends are intended to support.
Given that we're defining * and ? as shell-style wildcards, it's not
going to be feasible to handle very much of ordinary regex usage let
alone advanced.

> The more I think about this, a leading pipe could be used
> to pipe the output to a utility, so that \dn | egrep -v '(log|shadow)
> would work and would be the easiest solution.

This on the other hand seems more like a potentially useful feature,
although I'm unclear on what you expect to get sent through the pipe
exactly --- you want column headers for instance?  What if you're using
a nondefault display layout?

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Sean Chittenden
Дата:
Сообщение: \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...
Следующее
От: Sean Chittenden
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: \dn [PATTERN] handling not quite right...