Re: [HACKERS] Group By, NULL values and inconsistent behaviour.

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com (Darren King)
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Group By, NULL values and inconsistent behaviour.
Date: 1998-01-27 15:39:34
Message-ID: 199801271539.KAA05641@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> > > >For now, ignore the patch I sent. Appears from Andreas demo that the
> > > >current postgres code will follow the Informix style with regard to
> > > >grouping columns with NULL values. Now that I really think about it,
> > > >it does make more sense.
> > >
> > > I think I saw the patch committed this morning...?
> >
> > Yesterday evening, actually...should we back it out, or leave it
> > as is? Is the old way more corrrect the the new?
>
> Marc,
>
> >From the two responses demonstrating Informix and Sybase, I think the patch
> I sent should be backed out. I can live with NULL equaling NULL in the
> GROUP BY and ORDER BY clauses, but not in the WHERE clause, if everyone else
> is doing it that way.
>
> darrenk
>
>

Your patch backed out.

--
Bruce Momjian
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Martin 1998-01-27 16:13:39 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] How is PostgreSQL doing?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-01-27 15:36:05 Re: [HACKERS] postmaster crash and .s.pgsql file