| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway? |
| Date: | 2008-10-21 21:23:49 |
| Message-ID: | 200810211423.50685.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> An empty, single-dimension array. But I got the impression from Simon
> that he thought it should be NULL.
I disagree with Simon *if* that's what he's saying. '{}' isn't equivalent
to NULL any more than 0 or '' is. NULL means "I don't know / Doesn't
apply" wheras '{}' means "purposefully left blank". It's a defect of the
Timestamp type (and a few others) that it doesn't have a standard "zero"
value -- the typical tri-value NULL problem.
I do agree that we ought to support multi-dimensional empty arrays for
consistency. However: is '{}' = '{}{}' or not?
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-21 21:24:03 | Re: pg_ctl less than useful error message on windows when privileges wrong for postgres |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2008-10-21 21:21:41 | Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway? |