Re: XMLDocument (SQL/XML X030)

From: Chapman Flack <jcflack(at)acm(dot)org>
To: Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: XMLDocument (SQL/XML X030)
Date: 2025-01-28 14:54:51
Message-ID: 6798EFBB.9090608@acm.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 01/28/25 03:14, Jim Jones wrote:
> I'd say the difference is due to how the two systems handle the XML data
> type and unquoted identifiers in general, rather than a difference in
> the behaviour of the function itself.

I'd go further and say it's entirely down to how the two systems
handle unquoted identifiers. In neither case was there ever any
XML value created with XML names in one case and then changed to
the other. The SQL names were already in their (DB2- or PostgreSQL-
specific) folded form by the first moment any XML library code ever
saw them. The XML code handled them faithfully ever after, whether
in serialized or in node-tree form.

Presumably both DB2 and PostgreSQL users soon know in their sleep
what their respective systems do to unquoted identifiers, and know
that quoting is the way to control that when it matters.

Regards,
-Chap

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-01-28 16:17:07 Re: NOT ENFORCED constraint feature
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-01-28 14:01:58 Re: Windows CFBot is broken because ecpg dec_test.c error