Vik Fearing <vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) SELECT * FROM pg_am WHERE amname LIKE '%t%'; > QUERY PLAN > ----------------------------------- > Seq Scan on pg_am > Filter: (amname ~~ '%t%'::text) > (2 rows)
> Why don't we convert that back to LIKE? Trying to do so would make our schema-qualification problems worse not better. See https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/ffefc172-a487-aa87-a0e7-472bf29735c8%40gmail.com particularly https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/10492.1531515...@sss.pgh.pa.us We really need to invent some weird nonstandard syntax for IS DISTINCT FROM and related cases, in order to not have broken dump/reload scenarios. I'd just as soon not do that for LIKE, when the operator syntax serves well enough. regards, tom lane
