Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > On 2/23/15 3:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I thought of another possibility: >> >> 3. Leave everything as-is but mark the NOT-operator productions as having >> the precedence of NOT rather than of LIKE etc. This would change the >> behavior only for the NOT-LIKE-followed-by-< example, and would make the >> two cases for NOT LIKE consistent though they'd remain inconsistent with >> LIKE. This behavior seems at least somewhat explainable/documentable >> ("NOT-foo operators have the precedence of NOT"), whereas what we have >> seems about impossible to justify.
> I don't like this third option. If we're going to change anything, it > should be changed so that LIKE and NOT LIKE have the same precedence. Yeah, I concur. Working on patch to make that happen via token lookahead. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers