Re: [18] Unintentional behavior change in commit e9931bfb75

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [18] Unintentional behavior change in commit e9931bfb75
Date: 2024-12-03 06:32:47
Message-ID: 1747800.1733207567@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2024-12-02 at 17:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, also for compatibility with our SQL parser's understanding
>> of identifier lowercasing.

> But why only for single-byte encodings? And why not for ICU?

I think the not-for-utf8 exclusion was mostly because that was
how it was before, which was probably mostly historical accident.
(I do vaguely recall that there was discussion on the point, but
I'm too tired to go look in the archives for it.)

As for ICU, that didn't exist back then, and I'm not going to
defend whether it was a good idea for that code path to fail
to reproduce this behavior.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jian he 2024-12-03 06:43:00 Re: speedup ALTER TABLE ADD CHECK CONSTRAINT.
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-12-03 06:27:03 Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~)