Re: Bringing PostgreSQL torwards the standard regarding

Shachar Shemesh wrote:

> I'm opening a new thread, as the previous one was too nested, and
> contained too much emotions.
>
> I'll start by my understanding of a summary of the thread so far. The
> solution we are seeking would have to satisfy the following conditions:
> 1. Setting should be on a per-database level. A per-server option is
> not good enough, and a per-session option is too difficult to
> implement, with no apparent justifiable return.

I am not convinced on this point. Why is per-server not good enough? The
obvious place to make these changes seems to me to be during or
immediatly after the bootstrap phase of initdb. It would avoid a host of
later troubles.

>
> 2. Old applications already working with PG's lowercase folding should
> have an option to continue working unmodified for the foreseeable future.
>
> Solutions offered so far, and their status:
> 1. Tri-state. Folder upper, if failes, fold lower, if succeeds, warn.
> 2. Dual state. Fold lower or upper. Break if client is broken.
> 3. Create a database conversion tool to change existing case.

I don't think we should rush at this. All of these solutions are based
on the existing structures. I have started thinking about a solution
that would involve keeping two versions of catalog names: a canonical
name and a "name as supplied at creation". There would be heaps of
wrinkles, but it might get us where we want to be. But I have not had
time to sort it out in my head yet, let alone make any experiments.
Let's keep getting more ideas.

cheers

andrew