Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ben <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com>
Cc: "PostgreSQL General ((EN))" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres
Date: 2007-06-30 05:32:27
Message-ID: 14923.1183181547@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Ben <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> writes:
> On Jun 29, 2007, at 9:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm ... I fear Oracle's behavior is more correct, because if any
>> argument is null (ie, unknown), then who can say what the greatest or
>> least value is? It's unknown (ie, null). But I suspect our behavior
>> is more useful. Comments?

> I agree with you. I don't know what the spec says, but it seems clear
> Oracle is doing the proper thing and Postgres is doing the useful thing.

GREATEST/LEAST aren't in the spec, so there's not much help there.

Except ... if they ever do get added to the spec, what do you think
the spec will say? The odds it'd contradict Oracle seem about nil.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-06-30 05:44:41 Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres
Previous Message paul rivers 2007-06-30 05:29:45 Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres