Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: inconsistent composite type null handling in plpgsql out variable

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: inconsistent composite type null handling in plpgsql out variable
Date: 2009-08-31 17:26:59
Message-ID: 162867790908311026v37ab529i1e7530229d060244@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
2009/8/31 Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 02:06:02PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> 3) If we decide the sql standard is correct, so that (null, null) is
>> null == true, then we should observe rule 1 and make things work in
>> consistent way.  This means, for example, that null::foo and (null,
>> null)::foo should not be distinct.
>
> The more awkward case (to me anyway) is that the standard says (1,NULL)
> IS NULL should evaluate to TRUE.

what?

only (NULL, NULL) IS NULL is true

regards
Pavel Stehule

p.s. what isn't consistent (maybe - there are more possible interpretations) is

(NULL, NULL) IS DISTINCT FROM NULL is true






>
> I'd never noticed the ROW / RECORD dichotomy before; could one of these
> be made SQL compatible and the other use more sane semantics?
>
> --
>  Sam  http://samason.me.uk/
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2009-08-31 22:02:27
Subject: lost statistics; analyze needs to execute twice
Previous:From: Sam MasonDate: 2009-08-31 17:21:41
Subject: Re: inconsistent composite type null handling in plpgsql out variable

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group