| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Ben" <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL General \(\(EN\)\)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |
| Date: | 2007-06-30 15:51:08 |
| Message-ID: | 87sl89e903.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> Fwiw even in the min/max/sum case the spec is moving away from having
>> aggregates ignore NULL values. You now get a warning in Oracle if your
>> aggregate includes any NULL inputs.
>
> How does Oracle's new behavior relate to the standard moving?
Sorry I noticed that editing error only after I sent it. I should have changed
that to say Oracle was moving in that direction. There's nothing of the sort
in SQL2003 that I can find.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-06-30 15:55:51 | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-30 15:45:25 | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |