On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 12:55:46PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > To this you propose, as I understand it, to have a fourth possibility > which would be spec compliant for comparison purposes but would label > result set columns with the case preserved name originally used (or > would you use the casing used in the query?).
The big issue I see with this is that it would break PQfname on the client end, since that's case sensetive too. Most client languages are, so you really are between a rock and a hard place. Making PQfname case-insensetive also screws up in Tom's example. One way to appraoch this is to consider this a setting of the collation of the name datatype. If a case-insensetive collation is selected at initdb time, then Tom's example would indeed fail, but that's a choice someone made. Problem being, you'd have to export that choice to clients to make PQfname work, and that's going to messy. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to > litigate.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
