From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Kevin Field <kev(at)brantaero(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #4509: array_cat's null behaviour is inconsistent |
Date: | 2008-11-05 16:03:40 |
Message-ID: | 15122.1225901020@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Kevin Field wrote:
>> select array_cat(null::integer[], '{3}'::integer[]);
>> ...doesn't return NULL, which it should, for consistency.
> Doesn't make sense to me either. I found that this was changed between
> 8.1 (where it returns null) and 8.2, but I find nothing in the
> respective release notes or commit messages about this change. Tom?
Hm, I seem to have changed it in the patch that added support for nulls
within arrays, but I don't recall the reasoning for this detail ATM.
I'm loath to change just this one thing though. If we're going to
monkey with it, I think we should start by having a thought-through
proposal about the behavior of all the array functions for corner
cases like null arrays and empty arrays (cf recent discussion about
zero-dimensional arrays).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Keven Guindon | 2008-11-05 16:09:18 | BUG #4512: PostgreSQL crash on update command |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-05 15:33:16 | Re: BUG #4510: memory leak with libpg.dll |