The word "pattern" was meant to imply "regex pattern".
Specifically - the ability to search for a regex is much more useful then a plain-text only search (and costs us basically nothing).

Thanks for the clarification. I still think we should tackle the exception.

And on the other hand: I think in most cases this search is used for simple plain text cases. I understand that regex is costs us nothing - technically. But from the user experience side there is some room for improvement, I reckon.

We can probably add a checkbox, and some nicer handling for the exception. Or possibly, just adding the word "regex" might solve this from the "user expectation" side.

The word solution would solve it from the expecting side, you are right. Here in my company the search is used frequently and only as a plain text search. So we have to escape the special regex signs time and again. Just would be interested if this is seen as an issue by others who uses the feature.