Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> On the strength of this analysis, shouldn't we drop the separate >> UTF8 match function and just use SB_MatchText for UTF8?
> We still call NextChar() after "_", and I think we probably need to, > don't we? If so we can't just marry the cases. Doh, you're right ... but on third thought, what happens with a pattern containing "%_"? If % tries to advance bytewise then we'll be trying to apply NextChar in the middle of a data character, and bad things ensue. I think we need to go back to the scheme with SB_ and MB_ variants and no special case for UTF8. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org