I'm working on some legacy code that uses a MS SQL Server 2000 database. In one of the tables, there's a phone number field that is a varchar column. The application essentially treats a "Phone Number" as straight text, so there can be any type of value in this column.
Normally when I design a "phone number" field, I always remove formatting and rely on the view to display the phone number correctly. This provides consistency and allows for easy searching of phone numbers.
The problem I've run into is that I need to provide phone searching capabilities that will find a phone number regardless of how it's formatted in the column, but I can't change the existing data. Unfortunately, MS SQL Server 2000 doesn't have support for Regular Expressions and it's built-in pattern searching isn't powerful enough to do what I want to do.
This lead me to searching Google in which I found two solutions that will solve my problem—both of which are free.
The first solution is a custom function (UDF) for MS SQL Server 2000 called PatternReplace. The PatternReplace() UDF is designed to mimic the built-in SQL Replace() function, but it allows a search pattern for the string to find. This allows allows me to do:
This would find any phone number in the database that is 555-1212—regardless of how it's formated in the database (i.e. "(800) 555-1212", "800/555-1212", "800 555 1212", etc, etc.)
The other solution is an extended stored procedure written in C++ that gives you true Perl-like Regular Expression support. This project is called xp_pcre - Regular Expressions in T-SQL and was written by Dan Farino. This project has a number of UDFs that uses the extended stored procedure to give you all sorts of functionality. You can do a RegEx match, replace, format and split.
I haven't decided which solution I'm going to use yet. The code I'm working on needs to be portable and has to be able to be distributed to a client. Using an extended stored procedure adds a level of complication in that the client would need the extended stored procedure installed as well, where as PatternReplace() is pure SQL, it can be distributed with the database.
Anyway, I plan on doing some testing over the next few days to see which solution will work best for me.
Comments for this entry have been disabled.