[Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] box: remove unicode_ci for functions

[Konstantin Osipov]

* Kirill Yukhin <kyukhin at tarantool.org> [19/12/09 14:11]:
> > > > > >> Unicode_ci collation breaks the general
> > > > > >> rule for objects naming, so we remove it
> > > > > >> in version 2.3.1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The code works according to RFC.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > There is a justification for this behaviour in RFC.
> > > > 
> > > > Please see my reply with an explanation. The RFC was  written
> > > > presuming https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/4467 
> > > > will be fixed.
> > > 
> > > It was clearly pointed that proposal in #4467 is broken by
> > > design. Please see [1] for details. Having that said I think
> > > we should consider the proposal rejected and won't try to invent
> > > any new workarounds.
> > > 
> > > [1] - https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/4467#issuecomment-527210486 and later.
> > 
> > Even if you think the proposal is broken the problem is there
> > and needs resolution, not aggravation. 
> > 
> > Re initial proposal being broken I admitted it in the comment.
> > We'll have to do an incompatible change and violate ANSI - in
> > order to make the product usable. I suggested to add a
> > case-insensitive unique index to every system space already.
> 
> So, the proposal is to break backward compatibility and ANSI to
> make visual basic programmers happy? No, we won't do that in
> observable future.

Who is "we"? 

I don't see this has been discussed & rejected, so why are you
thinking you can make this decision?

Maybe "we" instead of making "decisions" goes to users and
customers and asks them what they expect?

> > As to the suggestion being broken - it will allow one to get rid
> > of uppercase-before-store and be mostly ansi compatible.
> 
> I do not see any issue here.

Yes, this is kind of obvious. 

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia