Jim Nasby wrote:
On Nov 14, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 10:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
We have namespaces to differentiate between two sources of object
names,
so anybody who creates a schema where MyColumn is not the same
On Nov 14, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 10:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
We have namespaces to differentiate between two sources of object
names,
so anybody who creates a schema where MyColumn is not the same
thing as
myCol
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 10:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We have namespaces to differentiate between two sources of object names,
> > so anybody who creates a schema where MyColumn is not the same thing as
> > myColumn is not following sensible rules for co
beau hargis wrote:
> Having installed DB2 Enterprise today and taking it for a spin, it does
> indeed
> behave in a similar manner. However, after reading through both
> specifications, it seems that DB2 follows more of the spec than PostgreSQL.
> The specifications state that for purpose of co
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We have namespaces to differentiate between two sources of object names,
> so anybody who creates a schema where MyColumn is not the same thing as
> myColumn is not following sensible rules for conceptual distance.
I'd agree that that is not a good desig
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 11:31 -0500, Chuck McDevitt wrote:
> But, stepping back from all that, what is it the users want?
>
> 1) When re-creating a CREATE TABLE statement from whatever catalog
> info, they'd like the names to come back exactly as then entered them.
> If I do:
> CREA
title like "sum(WeeklySales)"
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 10:38 PM
To: Chuck McDevitt
Cc: Stephan Szabo; beau hargis; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org;
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservati
"Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Equivalent, yes. But I can interpret that clause it mean I can show
> either the case folded or non-case-folded value in the information
> schema, as they are equivalent.
Well, that's an interesting bit of specs-lawyering, but I don't see
how you can
-Original Message-
From: Stephan Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 10:23 AM
To: Chuck McDevitt
Cc: Tom Lane; beau hargis; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org;
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservation disregarding case
On Tue, 31 Oct
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Chuck McDevitt wrote:
> We treated quoted identifiers as case-specific, as the spec requires.
>
> In the catalog, we stored TWO columns... The column name with case
> converted as appropriate (as PostgreSQL already does), used for looking
> up the attribute,
> And a second col
]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 10:35 PM
To: Chuck McDevitt
Cc: beau hargis; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservation disregarding case
sensitivity?
"Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
At Teradata, we certa
r 30, 2006 10:35 PM
To: Chuck McDevitt
Cc: beau hargis; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservation disregarding case
sensitivity?
"Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At Teradata, we certainly interpreted the
as
entered by the user.
So, your example would work just fine.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 10:35 PM
To: Chuck McDevitt
Cc: beau hargis; pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case
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 th
"Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At Teradata, we certainly interpreted the spec to allow case-preserving,
> but case-insensitive, identifiers.
Really?
As I see it, the controlling parts of the SQL spec are (SQL99 sec 5.2)
26) A and a are
equivalent if the of
IL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 7:24 PM
To: beau hargis
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Case Preservation disregarding case
sensitivity?
beau hargis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Considering th
beau hargis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Considering the differences that already exist between database systems and
> their varying compliance with SQL and the various extensions that have been
> created, I do not consider that the preservation of case for identifiers
> would violate any SQL s
On Friday 27 October 2006 19:38, Joe wrote:
> Hi Beau,
>
> On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 16:23 -0700, beau hargis wrote:
> > I am hoping that there is an easy way to obtain case-preservation with
> > case-insensitivity, or at the very least, case-preservation and complete
> > case-sensitivity, or case-pres
18 matches
Mail list logo
