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