Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on
Date
Msg-id ff0fa106-5029-b384-e266-197e9a21d437@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on  (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2/24/17 12:28 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think these are straw-man arguments, really.  Consider the actual use
>> case for such a feature: it's for porting some application that was not
>> written against Postgres to begin with.
> I'm not sure that's totally true.  I think at least some requests for
> this feature are intended at satisfying somebody's sense of
> aesthetics.

If I had $1 for every time I had to chase someone away from using 
camelcase I'd be able to sponsor a key at the next conference. And 
honetly I'd actually like to be able to use camelcase and still get easy 
to read output from \d & co.

IOW, this is definitely NOT driven just by porting efforts. I think the 
only reason we don't hear more requests about it is people (grudgingly) 
just muddle on without it.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Next
From: Ants Aasma
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?