From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
---|---|
To: | Richard_D_Levine(at)raytheon(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Oracle buys Innobase |
Date: | 2005-10-23 06:02:19 |
Message-ID: | 20051023060219.GA17200@wolff.to |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:07:05 -0500,
Richard_D_Levine(at)raytheon(dot)com wrote:
>
> Yep. It is not just limited to empty strings; An all blank string, no
> matter the number of characters, is stored as NULL. And a corollary to
> that idiocy is that a string with two blank characters is not equal to a
> string with a single blank character in Oracle. 'a ' is not equal to 'a
> '. 'a ' is not equal to 'a'. Port that to another database. Seen the
> JOIN syntax? *sigh*
I don't believe this is true.
The following example is from Oracle 9i:
SQL> select 1 from dual where ' ' is null;
no rows selected
SQL> select 1 from dual where '' is null;
1
----------
1
Peoplesoft uses ' ' in a lot of fields as sort of a missing value code. My
theory about this is that they want to avoid database specific weirdness
involving nulls and oracles treatment of null strings.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jean-Paul Argudo | 2005-10-23 22:24:49 | Advocate PostgreSQL in France : next booths |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2005-10-21 18:17:48 | Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christian Kratzer | 2005-10-23 07:26:13 | Re: Transaction IDs not the same in same transaction? |
Previous Message | Steve V | 2005-10-23 05:41:48 | Re: Transaction IDs not the same in same transaction? |