Hello Dr. Hipp,
Hello dear sqlite users,
following my post regarding how sqlite treats
column names and the reply from Dr. Hipp, I've studied the way various RDBMS
treat column names. The document containing the results obtained is attached to
this message.
The conclusions I can draw from these
investigations is this: although not all queries tested work on all tested
database engines, the ones that do work provide consistent results (e.g. SQL
Server and MySQL yield the same results).
Although things could further change in order to
provide a uniform handling with column names, I only insist on one thing: if I
ask for column Field1 and that column exists in the table as FIELD1, sqlite
should return it as I ask, e.g. Field1 (instead of the way it does now, FIELD1).
I cannot understand why this behavior has changed
(it did not happen with 3.0.8). If this is not a bug, I guess it's a feature. If
it's a feature, what advantages do I have if the database engine doesn't give me
what I ask for? Please understand that I'm not trying to criticise anything or
anyone: I'm just trying to understand why this has happened and why people do
not complain about it.
Thanks.
George. |
- [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column names (was: Trouble with... George Ionescu
- Re: [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column names (was: Tro... Clay Dowling
- Re: [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column names (was:... George Ionescu
- Re: [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column names (... D. Richard Hipp
- Re: [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column nam... George Ionescu
- Re: [sqlite] RDBMS handling of column names (was: Tro... George Ionescu