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


From: Juliano Ignacio <jsignacio(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: Bhuvan A <bhuvansql(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re:
Date: 2002-03-11 20:12:07
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Bhuvan A wrote:

> If you compare a NULL with anything you don't 
> get a true value whether you're comparing with 
> =, !=, <, >, etc...  That's how it's defined to
> behave.
> where did you get this definition of behaviour!?
> is it applicable only to
> postgres or ..?  its quite strange yaar!

I think that you are searching for a solution, so,
view the COALESCE SQL function in PostgreSQL
documentation. It will help you in your compares.

Juliano S. Ignacio

Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!

In response to

  • Re: at 2002-03-11 17:02:09 from Stephan Szabo

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: pgsql-bugsDate: 2002-03-11 21:59:08
Subject: Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously checkpointed value after crash
Previous:From: Mozilla at MarelaDate: 2002-03-11 17:59:31
Subject: Critical: Pgsql inserts bad timestamp (seconds 60.00) - causes failing of backup-restore

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group