[GENERAL] Regex

Hi All, Is there a way to execute a regex, inside a SELECT statement, to substitute things? For example: SELECT name FROM mytable; name - john michael robert richard chandler I want to substitute all "r" to "-" SELECT myfunction(name) FROM mytable; name - john michael

Re: [GENERAL] Regex

MaRCeLO PeReiRA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there a way to execute a regex, inside a SELECT > statement, to substitute things? There's a regex_replace() function in recent PG versions. Or you could write a function in plperl or pltcl to use the regex capabilities of those languages.

Re: [GENERAL] Regex

If your version does not support regexp_replace(), I have written a similar function for easlier versions of postgresql using pl/pgsql called regexp_replacex(). You can find it by searching google groups. As the thread there points out, the function I wrote doesn't treat NULLs properly as posted an

[GENERAL] Regex problem

I'm usually ok at Regex stuff, but this one is driving me a bit crazy. Here's a string in a single field. I'm trying to grab the long db query bit. --- initial time: 0.0001058578491210 After _request set time: 0.0001859664916992 Bef

[GENERAL] Regex problems

I'm running 6.3.2 on RedHat 5.0. I have the following table: Table    = employees +-+--+---+ |    Field    |  Type    | Length| +-+--+---+ | id  

[GENERAL] regex help wanted

Hi, I am in the process of converting some TEXT data which I try to identify by regular expression. What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a substring ? select substring ('junk $$ junk' from '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); I would have thought the '::[^:]+?>' part should ha

Re: [GENERAL] Regex problem

"Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ...Which is not surprising. It's greedy. So, I turn off the greediness > of the first + with a ? and then I get this > select substring (notes from E'LONG DB QUERY.+?time: [0-9]+.[0-9]+') > from table where id=1; > LONG DB QUERY (db1, 4.937628984451

Re: [GENERAL] Regex problem

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Scott Marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> ...Which is not surprising. It's greedy. So, I turn off the greediness >> of the first + with a ? and then I get this > >> select substring (notes from E'LONG DB QUERY.+?time: [0-

[GENERAL] Regex Character-Class

Greets, I must be missing something here: SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^\d+'; returns FALSE, when I would expect TRUE, as for: SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^[[:digit:]]+'; ie, '[[:digit:]]' != '\d' In config, "regex_flavor = advanced". Any ideas? Thanks Henry pgptxHPEfsSfe.pgp Description: PGP Digit

[GENERAL] Regex substring help

Im trying to get all the text before the '' tag. SELECT SUBSTRING('onetwothree','(^.*).*$'); returns "onetwo" How do I get it to return "one"? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-ge

Re: [GENERAL] Regex problems

If you want to select all the employes whose last name begins with a C you would use this regex '^C'. The ^ signifys the beginning of the string and you dont need a * after the C because a * means _zero_ or more matches, and that is the problem you were having chris yambo thoughtbubble productio

[GENERAL] Regex files are missing

Hi,   Have some issues to built the pg_trgm module from source. For first the regexport.h file was missing in /usr/include, so I got it. Now I still need the the regexport.c file and probably also the other one You can see the files in this link: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a

[GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

Hello, I have query phone number in database as follows: [123) 456-7890 (123) 456-7890 When I query like this: SELECT * FROM phone WHERE phone_number ~ ('^\[123' || '[-\s\)]{0,2}' || '456' || '[-\s\)]{0,2}' || '7890') it use Index but if I query like this (notice first character is open paren

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

Karsten Hilbert writes: > What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a > substring ? > select substring ('junk $$ junk' from > '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); There's a perfectly valid match in which [^<]+? matches allergy::test and [^:]+? matches 99. rega

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

On 25 April 2013 15:32, Tom Lane wrote: > Karsten Hilbert writes: >> What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a >> substring ? > >> select substring ('junk $$ junk' from >> '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); > > There's a perfectly valid match in which [^<]+? matches allergy::test >

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:32:26AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Karsten Hilbert writes: > > What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a > > substring ? > > > select substring ('junk $$ junk' from > > '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); > > There's a perfectly valid match in which [^<]+? m

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:40:51PM +0100, Thom Brown wrote: > On 25 April 2013 15:32, Tom Lane wrote: > > Karsten Hilbert writes: > >> What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a > >> substring ? > > > >> select substring ('junk $$ junk' from > >> '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$');

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

Karsten Hilbert writes: > I would have thought "<[^<]+?:" should mean: > match a "<" > followed by 1-n characters as long as they are not "<" > until the VERY NEXT ":" > The "?" should make the "+" after "[^<]" non-greedy and thus > stop at the first occurrence of ":", right ?

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

On 2013-04-25, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:32:26AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Karsten Hilbert writes: >> > What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a >> > substring ? >> >> >select substring ('junk $$ junk' from >> > '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); >> >>

Re: [GENERAL] regex help wanted

> On 2013-04-25, Karsten Hilbert wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:32:26AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> Karsten Hilbert writes: >>> > What I don't understand is: Why does the following return a >>> > substring ? >>> >>> > select substring ('junk $$ junk' from >>> '\$<[^<]+?::[^:]+?>\$'); >>

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Character-Class

In response to Henry : > Greets, > > I must be missing something here: > > SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^\d+'; > > returns FALSE, when I would expect TRUE, as for: Try: test=*# SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^\\d+'; ?column? -- t (1 row) Regards, Andreas -- Andreas Kretschmer Kontakt: Heynitz: 03

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Character-Class

Henry schrieb: I must be missing something here: SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^\d+'; returns FALSE, when I would expect TRUE, as for: SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^[[:digit:]]+'; ie, '[[:digit:]]' != '\d' In config, "regex_flavor = advanced". Any ideas? Yes; you have to escape the backslash character:

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Character-Class

Quoting "A. Kretschmer" : Try: test=*# SELECT '1.1.1.1' ~ E'^\\d+'; Ag, of course, thanks Andreas. Cheers Henry pgp5XMelkfQ4Y.pgp Description: PGP Digital Signature

Re: [GENERAL] Regex substring help

On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 03:22:12PM -0700, Nick wrote: > Im trying to get all the text before the '' tag. > > SELECT SUBSTRING('onetwothree','(^.*).*$'); > > returns "onetwo" > > How do I get it to return "one"? You can either use a non-greedy regex like this: SELECT substring('onetwothree','(^

Re: [GENERAL] regex back-references?

At 1:30 AM -0400 8/21/2000, Tom Lane wrote: >Michael Blakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Does postgresql support regex back-references? > >There's no such function at the SQL level, AFAIR. > >I'd recommend writing a function in either plperl or pltcl, according >to your taste. Both offer pre

Re: [GENERAL] regex back-references?

Michael Blakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do I need to tell postgres to rebuild pg_language, perhaps? See the createlang utility script. PL languages aren't installed by default (due to possibly-overzealous concern about security). regards, tom lane

Re: [GENERAL] regex back-references?

At 4:26 PM -0400 8/21/2000, Tom Lane wrote: >Michael Blakeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Do I need to tell postgres to rebuild pg_language, perhaps? > >See the createlang utility script. PL languages aren't installed >by default (due to possibly-overzealous concern about security). Thanks -

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

On 11/18/2013 07:34 AM, Janek Sendrowski wrote: Hi, Have some issues to built the pg_trgm module from source. For first the regexport.h file was missing in /usr/include, so I got it. Now I still need the the regexport.c file and probably also the other one You can see the files in this link: htt

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

Adrian Klaver writes: > On 11/18/2013 07:34 AM, Janek Sendrowski wrote: >> Have some issues to built the pg_trgm module from source. > FYI I find those files in the source I downloaded from the Postgres site: Sounds like Janek is trying to build 9.3 pg_trgm against a pre-9.3 server installation.

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

Hi,   My current version is 9.2. I could just update it. I got the pg_trgm from here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=tree;f=contrib/pg_trgm;hb=refs/heads/master   And the regex files from here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=tree;f=src/include/reg

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

On 11/18/2013 08:32 AM, Janek Sendrowski wrote: Hi, My current version is 9.2. I could just update it. I got the pg_trgm from here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=tree;f=contrib/pg_trgm;hb=refs/heads/master And the regex files from here: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=p

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

Janek Sendrowski wrote: > My current version is 9.2. I could just update it. > I got the pg_trgm from here: > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=tree;f=contrib/pg_trgm;hb=refs/heads/master Get a production release version from the snapshot tarball downloads or use a URL that l

Re: [GENERAL] Regex files are missing

Thanks for your help! I updated to version 9.3 and now it's working. Janek Sendrowski -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

Naoko Reeves writes: > I have query phone number in database as follows: > [123) 456-7890 > (123) 456-7890 > When I query like this: > SELECT * FROM phone > WHERE phone_number ~ ('^\[123' || '[-\s\)]{0,2}' || '456' || '[-\s\)]{0,2}' > || '7890') > it use Index but if I query like this (notice

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

Tom, Thank you for your quick reply. Data start with "(123" only returns 28 records where as phone number start with"[123" returns 1. Changed the data so that both will return 1 row. One with "(999" query takes about 30 seconds (30983ms) without index. One with "[999" take about 28 ms with index.

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

On Aug 11, 2011, at 18:26, Naoko Reeves wrote: > Hello, > I have query phone number in database as follows: > [123) 456-7890 > > (123) 456-7890 > Store phone numbers without formatting...the data is the numbers themselves the formatting is presentation. > When I query like this: > > SELECT

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

Naoko Reeves writes: > Also forgot to mentioned the version: > select version() >> "PostgreSQL 8.4.6 on i386-apple-darwin, compiled by GCC > i686-apple-darwin8-gcc-4.0.1 (GCC) 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5370), Oh --- there's your problem. In 8.4 and earlier, we don't trust \( to be a lite

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

Now that I read more closely the alternation is actually concatenation. My point still stands but your issue is that you have not created a functional index on the decryption result of the encrypted phone number. PostgreSQL does not know that the decrypted phone number is equivalent to the une

Re: [GENERAL] Regex Query Index question

> > Not testing here but... and ignore whitespace > > '^( [ \[\( ]? \s* \d{3} \s* [ -\s\]\) ] \d{3} [ -\s ] \d{4} )$' > Some tweaks needed but seriously consider dropping RegEx and going the functional index route. > '^( [ \[\( ]? \s* \d{3} \s* [ -\s\]\) ] \s* \d{3} \s* [ -\s ] \s* \d{4} )$'

[GENERAL] Regex query not using index

I'm running a simple query on 8.2. With this syntax, Explain indicate that the index is scanned: select * from eod where name = 'AA' However, when I change the query to use simple regex: select * from eod where name ~ 'AA' now Explain indicates a seq scan: Index Scan using equity_eod_symbol_idx

[GENERAL] Regex with patterns in table field

Hi,   like to know how, if possible, for patterns as attribute in a table to be used in a regex search with a fixed string. The query should therefore return the rows that have matching patterns with the single text.   Regards pgdb Free POP3 Email from www.gawab

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

On Feb 19, 2008, at 9:32 PM, Postgres User wrote: I'm running a simple query on 8.2. With this syntax, Explain indicate that the index is scanned: select * from eod where name = 'AA' However, when I change the query to use simple regex: select * from eod where name ~ 'AA' now Explain indicate

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Thanks, my dumb mistake. I need to perform the equivalent of a WHERE clause OR expression using regex to match exact strings. _ this example hits the index: select * from eod where name ~ '^BA$' but when I try to add another

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Postgres User wrote: Yes that works, but the whole point of the exercise is replace many OR statements with 1 regex expression. So it's not what I'm looking for. Why do you want it done this way? You can build an array of strings to check and use an in clause. Using php : $checks = array('A

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

im trying to allow the client to pass a varchar param into my function, and want to avoid any parsing of the parameter inside the function, or code to build a sql string. if the function can use this code, it will be compiled and optimized (unlike a dynamic sql stirng) select * from mytable where

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

"Postgres User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes that works, but the whole point of the exercise is replace many OR > statements with 1 regex expression. So it's not what I'm looking for. Unfortunately, Postgres is not as intelligent as you are. There is no mechanism to rewrite a multi-branch r

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Yes that works, but the whole point of the exercise is replace many OR statements with 1 regex expression. So it's not what I'm looking for. On Feb 19, 2008 9:16 PM, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Postgres User wrote: > > Thanks, my dumb mistake. > > I need to perform the equivalent of a WHER

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Postgres User wrote: Thanks, my dumb mistake. I need to perform the equivalent of a WHERE clause OR expression using regex to match exact strings. _ this example hits the index: select * from eod where name ~ '^BA$' but wh

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

by the way, your example works fine unless it's a null value or empty string unfortunately, postgres isn't smart enough to know that the when p_param below is null, that the WHERE condition can be ignored select * from table where name in (Coalesce(p_param, name)) which is the same as: select *

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Postgres User wrote: by the way, your example works fine unless it's a null value or empty string unfortunately, postgres isn't smart enough to know that the when p_param below is null, that the WHERE condition can be ignored select * from table where name in (Coalesce(p_param, name)) which is

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

doh! tom, let me know if you decide to hack out a fix for this one of these nights ;) thanks for your help. On Feb 19, 2008 9:45 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Postgres User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Yes that works, but the whole point of the exercise is replace many OR > > sta

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

a final question: why does this syntax do a seq scan + filter: select * from tablea where fielda = fielda -or- select * from tablea where fielda in (fielda) while this syntax results in no filter, seq scan only select * from tablea where 1 = 1 it seems that both where clauses should be ignor

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 12:56:54AM -0800, Postgres User wrote: > a final question: why does this syntax do a seq scan + filter: > > select * from tablea where fielda = fielda -or- select * from > tablea where fielda in (fielda) > > while this syntax results in no filter, seq scan only > > sel

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Postgres User wrote: im trying to allow the client to pass a varchar param into my function, and want to avoid any parsing of the parameter inside the function, or code to build a sql string. if the function can use this code, it will be compiled and optimized (unlike a dynamic sql stirng) sele

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Tino, My users are developers and the goal was to accept a simple comma-delimited list of string values as a function's input parameter. The function would then parse this input param into a valid regex expression. I was trying to write a function that lets me avoid using Execute and instead wr

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

"Postgres User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My users are developers and the goal was to accept a simple > comma-delimited list of string values as a function's input parameter. > The function would then parse this input param into a valid regex > expression. Why are you fixated on this being a

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

Tom, I was looking for another approach but didn't come across that array syntax in my searches (perhaps because it's newer. Thanks for a solution. Now to end my fixation, one last item. What about the case of a null or empty param value- is there a way to assign a condition value that Postgres

Re: [GENERAL] Regex query not using index

On Feb 20, 2008, at 5:51 PM, Postgres User wrote: Now to end my fixation, one last item. What about the case of a null or empty param value- is there a way to assign a condition value that Postgres will ignore when processing the query? This syntax results in a seq scan: WHERE fielda = Coale

[GENERAL] Regex match not back-referencing in function

Hi, Could someone explain the following behaviour? SELECT regexp_replace(E'Hello & goodbye ',E'([&])','&#' || ascii(E'\\1') || E';\\1'); This returns: regexp_replace Hello \& goodbye (1 row) So it matched: SELECT chr(92); chr - \ (1 row) But notice that w

Re: [GENERAL] Regex with patterns in table field

am 13.04.2006, um 12:47:38 + mailte pgdb folgendes: > > > > > Hi, >   > like to know how, if possible, for patterns > as attribute in a table to be used in a regex search with a > fixed string. The query should therefore return the rows that > have matching patterns with the single text.

Re: [GENERAL] Regex with patterns in table field

Hi Andreas,   strange but I don't see html from my original email received from the mailing list, hope this reply is ok:)   If I'm not wrong, the example you've provided is trying to return matching rows from multiple patterns and texts as inputs in the regex search.   The text in regular _expres

Re: [GENERAL] Regex with patterns in table field

On 4/14/06, pgdb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Andreas, > > strange but I don't see html from my original email received from the > mailing list, hope this reply is ok:) > > If I'm not wrong, the example you've provided is trying to return matching > rows from multiple patterns and texts as i

Re: [GENERAL] Regex with patterns in table field

Hi Chris,   the query below works for me -   select * from TABLENAME where 'TEXT' ~ pattern;   Thanks for helping!   Regards   chris smith writes: > On 4/14/06, pgdb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >> >> Hi Andreas, >> >> strange but I don't see html from my original email received from the

Re: [GENERAL] Regex match not back-referencing in function

Thom Brown writes: > What am I missing? I might be more confused than you, but I think you're supposing that the result of ascii(E'\\1') has something to do with the match that the surrounding regexp_replace function will find, later on when it gets executed. The actual arguments seen by regexp_

Re: [GENERAL] Regex match not back-referencing in function

On Feb 12, 2012, at 13:26, Thom Brown wrote: > Hi, > > Could someone explain the following behaviour? > > SELECT regexp_replace(E'Hello & goodbye ',E'([&])','&#' || > ascii(E'\\1') || E';\\1'); > > This returns: > > regexp_replace > > Hello \& goodbye > (1 row) >

Re: [GENERAL] Regex match not back-referencing in function

On 12 February 2012 18:49, Tom Lane wrote: > Thom Brown writes: >> What am I missing? > > I might be more confused than you, but I think you're supposing that > the result of ascii(E'\\1') has something to do with the match that > the surrounding regexp_replace function will find, later on when i

[GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Sorry to have to ask the experts here for some regex assistance again. I am admittadly awful with these and could use some help. Have the following string (this is an example) that needs to be changed. Need to use a search and replace because the links across over 200K records are similar but not

[GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Hello all! Sorry to have to ask the experts here for some regex assistance again. I am admittadly awful with these and could use some help. Have the following string (this is an example) that needs to be changed. Need to use a search and replace because the links across over 200K records are simi

[GENERAL] Regex escape [ character and change text result into integer

Hi. I am using array_dims to give me dimensions of multidimensional array ie: [1:5][1:2] In my function I want to retreive the value of the second number from array_dims (5 in example above) This is what I am trying: count_str = substr(dimensions from '\[\d\:(\d+)\]\[\d\:\d\]') (this shou

Re: [GENERAL] Regex escape [ character and change text result into

Hi Tom. I misread the manual. I thought I could not do array_upper on multidimensional array but it was specific concatenation functions. Thank you for clarifying this. Regards, David On Tuesday, July 5, 2005, at 01:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: David Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi. I am

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Hello Chris, On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Christopher Molnar < cmol...@ourworldservices.com> wrote: > Any suggestions? > This seems to works: select regexp_replace('Complete the attached lab and submit via dropbox\rhttps://owncloud.porterchester.edu/HVACR/PCI_GasHeat/GasElectrical/HVACR1114_

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Will this work? UPDATE your_table SET your_column = REPLACE (your_column, 'HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf', '&file=HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf') WHERE ; Your mileage may vary because you have not stated your VERSION of PostgreSQL or your O/S. On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Christopher Molnar < cmol...@ou

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Christopher Molnar < cmol...@ourworldservices.com> wrote: Given this... > 'Complete the attached lab and submit via dropbox\rhttps://owncloud.porterchester.edu/HVACR/PCI_GasHeat/GasElectrical/HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf"; > title="Lab 13A">Lab 13A<\a>' > ​I have no cl

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > Will this work? > > UPDATE your_table >SET your_column = REPLACE (your_column, 'HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf', > '&file=HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf') > WHERE ; > > Your mileage may vary because you have not stated your VERSION of > PostgreSQL or

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Although, in this particular case, it is not version or O/S specific, it is generally a good policy (and manners) to state them whenever contacting this mail list. In that way, future users that refer back to problems have it documented as to which are and are not version specific. On Mon, Dec 28,

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Thank you Felix that was exactly what I needed! -Chris On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Félix GERZAGUET wrote: > Hello Chris, > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Christopher Molnar < > cmol...@ourworldservices.com> wrote: > >> Any suggestions? >> > This seems to works: > > select regexp_replac

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

Chris, First, even though it may or may not apply in this instance, it is ALWAYS a good idea (and good manners) to provide the PostgreSQL version and your O/S when posting to this board. I have also previously replied that the following should work: UPDATE pcilms_assign SET intro = REPLACE (i

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

## Christopher Molnar (cmolna...@gmail.com): > I have tried something like: > > update pcilms_assign set intro=regexp_replace(intro, '/([^/]*)\" title=$', > '&files=\1') where intro like '%https://owncloud.porterchester.edu%' and > course=18 and id=55413; http://blog.codinghorror.com/parsing-ht

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

## Melvin Davidson (melvin6...@gmail.com): > UPDATE pcilms_assign >SET intro = REPLACE (intro, 'HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf', > '&file=HVACR1114_LAB_13A.pdf') > WHERE intro like 'https://owncloud.porterchester.edu%' > AND course=18 and id=55413; Unfortunately, that tries to do the right th

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Christopher Molnar wrote: > Hello all! > > Sorry to have to ask the experts here for some regex assistance again. I > am admittadly awful with these and could use some help. > > Any suggestions? > I have found over the years that it is far easier to write a short

Re: [GENERAL] Regex help again (sorry, I am bad at these)

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Michael Nolan wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Christopher Molnar > wrote: > >> Hello all! >> >> Sorry to have to ask the experts here for some regex assistance again. I >> am admittadly awful with these and could use some help. >> >> Any suggestions? >>

[GENERAL] Regex "embedded options" does only work on the whole pattern?

Hi, I can see postgresql claims to supports regular expression flags: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/functions-matching.html#POSIX-EMBEDDED-OPTIONS-TABLE which I suppose aims to be the equivalent of perl's *(?adluimsx-imsx:pattern)

Re: [GENERAL] Regex escape [ character and change text result into integer

David Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi. I am using array_dims to give me dimensions of multidimensional > array ie: > [1:5][1:2] > In my function I want to retreive the value of the second number from > array_dims (5 in example above) Why aren't you using array_upper()? > This is what

Re: [GENERAL] Regex "embedded options" does only work on the whole pattern?

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 8:49 AM, matshyeq wrote: > Does that mean these "EMBEDDED OPTIONS" can be only defined at the > beginning of the pattern and therefore don't offer anything extra over *flags > *option? > ​Yes, this is how they behave. The most important difference is that: column ~ 'rege

Re: [GENERAL] Regex "embedded options" does only work on the whole pattern?

matshyeq writes: > I can see postgresql claims to supports regular expression flags: Yup. > What I find don't makes sense to me is that those flags could be used to > switch on/off match feature locally as opposed to the whole regex (same as > though flags parameters of regex functions). Not al

Re: [GENERAL] Regex "embedded options" does only work on the whole pattern?

Makes sense. Thank you both for clarifications! Was only wondering if this feature is there so I could elegantly do equivalent of perl's (small 'a', anycase 'sd', small 'f'): $,="\n"; my $testr='1asdf 2AsdF 3AsDF 4asDf 5aSDf 6aSdf 7ASdf 8Asdf'; my @res = $testr =~ /a(?i:sd)f/g; print @res; - a