On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:52 pm, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> It makes no difference if it's a corner case.  Slony is supposed to
> provide generic support, which means we _have_ to support this.

Perhaps we mean different things by "corner case". I mean this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corner_case

As in, something we don't reasonably expect people to try to do. I think 
creating table-names in the same DB in the same schema that are 
differentiated only by the case of the name is unreasonable. 

I'd be happy enough if the solution was simply to allow the perl tools to 
generate usable output for the common case (and yes, maintain generic support 
for people who really want account, ACCOUNT and aCcOuNt to describe three 
different tables).

> Right.  It appears to me that this is a documentation issue.

What do you plan to put in the documentation? "Warning: table-names may not be 
recognised using the same names as you used in your SQL script to create 
them." 

It just seems to me to make life one little bit harder than it needs to be, in 
what must surely be the most common case (no pun intended).

Regards, Philip.

-- 

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

-----------------
Utiba Pty Ltd 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Utiba mail server and is 
believed to be clean.