From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,
        Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
        Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
        pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: initdb's -c option behaves wrong way?
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+TgmoZYa5hNgdadYwNfpReykW7RU5egpzrFaAMwFA9qz0g=eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <202401171615.uzdmkozzvo6x@alvherre.pgsql>
 <2040188.1705511127@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <5DFF3111-8ECA-4EF5-B614-9A4C9FAB29BC@yesql.se>
 <CA+TgmoZYa5hNgdadYwNfpReykW7RU5egpzrFaAMwFA9qz0g=eg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:57:35 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <2062979.1705523170.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:26:10 -0500
Message-ID: <2062980.1705523170@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2062980.1705523170%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 2:31=E2=80=AFPM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.=
se> wrote:
>> Agreed, I think the patch as it stands now where it replaces case insen=
sitive,
>> while keeping the original casing, is the best path forward.  The issue=
 exist
>> in 16 as well so I propose a backpatch to there.

> I like that approach, too. I could go either way on back-patching. It
> doesn't seem important, but it probably won't break anything, either.

We just added this switch in 16, so I think backpatching to keep all
the branches consistent is a good idea.

However ... I don't like the patch much.  It seems to have left
the code in a rather random state.  Why, for example, didn't you
keep all the code that constructs the "newline" value together?
I'm also unconvinced by the removal of the "assume there's only
one match" break --- if we need to support multiple matches
I doubt that's sufficient.

			regards, tom lane