Re: [SQL] NULL

On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:

> My recollection of this thread was that no one found any reason to
> dis-allow NULL as a column (pseudo)constraint, other than it not being
> in the SQL92 standard. In particular, I understood Jan to say that he

That's a pretty strong reason, in absence of any other good ones. The
product is called PostgreSQL and not PostgreSybase or whatever. We
shouldn't have to follow other vendors' questionable decisions. It's not
really that hard to prepare any incompatible dumps you might have.

> tried it, and received no shift/reduce conflicts from flex. I think we
> all agree with Tom that there's no need for it, so we shouldn't give up
> anything else to get it, but several people mentioned having it easied
> porting from Sybase, or some other commercial db, where the machine
> generated DDL dumps include the NULL constraints. So, class it with the
> other compatability hacks, and include it, perhaps?
>
> Ross
>

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden