| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: comparing rows |
| Date: | 2000-08-03 14:40:24 |
| Message-ID: | 7818.965313624@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I thought our only kludge was allowing = NULL because we got tons of MS
> folks complaining in the past before we did this. Are you thinking that
> the newer MS versions will not give us a problem.
Well, I'm not sure. Magnus is saying that the newer MS servers default
to spec-compliant semantics --- ie, foo = NULL will yield NULL. But
IIRC the original complaints were because MS tools like Access would
*generate* this expression and expect it to behave like foo IS NULL.
Can MS have fixed all their apps already? Seems unlikely. Maybe we
have to leave the kluge in there awhile longer.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-08-03 14:56:30 | Re: [HACKERS] random() function produces wrong range |
| Previous Message | Don Baccus | 2000-08-03 14:37:17 | Re: comparing rows |