-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gregor,
Gregor Schneider wrote:
| Sure, there are a lot of possible solutions, however, it would ease up
| things if MySQL would behave as expected by the "common programmer".
Sorry, but the "common programmer" ought to know that, in spite of SQL's
Hi Todd,
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:23 PM, Boyd, Todd M. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You can use "WHERE x LIKE condition" to perform a case-sensitive search
> without modifying the structure of the table(s) involved by using the
> BINARY keyword.
>
well, I could so so - however, I'm talking ab
Gregor,
You can use "WHERE x LIKE condition" to perform a case-sensitive search
without modifying the structure of the table(s) involved by using the
BINARY keyword.
"SELECT * FROM `foo` WHERE `bar` LIKE BINARY 'tesT'" will not pull the
record "test" or "Test", but only matches the record "tesT".
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gregor,
Gregor Schneider wrote:
| thanks a lot, that's the reason why.
|
| I'm wondering what those guys from MySQL thought when introducing this
| "feature"...
Try this:
ALTER TABLE users
~ MODIFY COLUMN user_name VARCHAR(40) BINARY
;
No need t
Todd,
I absolutly disagree:
A database is a container holding some peaces of information.
Usually, a database is transparent for the programmer: He doesn't need
to about the details of the soring-mechanisms, but *what* he has to
know is that "fooBar" != "FooBar" - fullstop.
if you application n
When you think about how many people would be asking how to make them
case-insensitive versus how many need to perform case-sensitive
searching, it makes sense to me.
Todd Boyd
Web Programmer
> -Original Message-
> From: Gregor Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
8< snip!
> I'm wonder
Hi Paul.
thanks a lot, that's the reason why.
I'm wondering what those guys from MySQL thought when introducing this
"feature"...
Anyways, thanks again!
Gregor
--
what's puzzlin' you, is the nature of my game
gpgp-fp: 79A84FA526807026795E4209D3B3FE028B3170B2
gpgp-key available @ http://pgpkeys
Gregor Schneider wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm just a bit puzzled, maybe one of you can shed some light:
We're running Tomcat 5.5 here having created a JDBC-realm holding our
users & their credentials:
The DDL of the MySQL-Tables shows like
However, we've just discovered that Tomcat doesn't care at all
Hi guys,
I'm just a bit puzzled, maybe one of you can shed some light:
We're running Tomcat 5.5 here having created a JDBC-realm holding our
users & their credentials:
The DDL of the MySQL-Tables shows like
users:
user_name varchar(40) PRI
user_passvarchar(50)
user_group int(11
