On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Roman Rokytskyy <rrokytskyy@...> wrote:

> > So it was more complicated than that small fix.
>
> Yep. :) But your fix would perfectly work in your particular case.
>
> BTW, the current implementation does not cover all possible situations
> when more than one pattern is available via API, only two extremes:
>
> a) when a correct case is used - one query is executed;
> b) when somebody passes low-case/camelCased identifiers instead of
> UPPERCASED - that will cause two queries executed.
>
> Latter is the most common situation and must be handled for the backward
> compatibility reasons.
>
> Current fix does not cover cases where one pattern is correct case and
> one - not uppercased. In this case no match will happen. But at the
> moment it looks like a reasonable trade off.
>

Ok, cool.

Thanks for the update.

PS: I have opened a request for support for arrays, but now that I
know that you can only declare arrays, I think it is not that useful
after all.