Stephan Szabo wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Randall Smith wrote:
Scott Marlowe wrote:
This whole discussion is reminding me of one of my personal mantras, and
that is that relying on "artifacts" of behaviour is generally a bad
idea.
For instance, many databases accept != for not equal, but the sql
standard quite clearly says it's <>.
If you're relying on case folding meaning that you don't have to
consistently use the same capitalization when referring to variables,
table names, people, or anything else, you're asking for trouble down
the line, and for little or no real gain today.
I know that a lot of times we are stuck with some commercial package
that we can't do anything to fix, so I'm not aiming this comment at the
average dba, but at the developer.
Yea, this is a commercial package, but it's actually doing it right.
Since it doesn't know how a user will name a table or column, it always
calls them as quoted strings in upper case which is standards compliant,
but doesn't work with PG. So if a user names a table 55 and mine, it
calls "55 AND MINE" and for foo, it calls "FOO". Looks like they did it
right to me.
Maybe, but the 55 and mine example may or may not actually work. 55 and
mine isn't a valid regular identifier. "55 and mine" would be a valid
identifier, but that's not the same identifier as "55 AND MINE".
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Your right. Its not a correct example. I think the point is clear, though.
Randall
