Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> But actually here's an even simpler workaround, which is IMHO less
> ugly than the original one:
> SELECT foo, bar, (SELECT regexp_matches(bar, pattern)) FROM table;
Doesn't that blow up if the subselect returns more than one row?
I think you could make it work by wrapping regexp_matches in a
simple (non-SETOF) SQL function, but just writing out the sub-SELECT
doesn't do it. This goes back to the recent discussion of why SQL
functions can't always be inlined --- the semantics are a bit
different in some cases.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
