From: | jo <jose(dot)soares(at)sferacarta(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #6669: unique index w/ multiple columns and NULLs |
Date: | 2012-06-05 07:16:22 |
Message-ID: | 4FCDB246.6080001@sferacarta.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 11:56 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> I get your point about COUNT(*) really counting rows, not values, but
>> why doesn't GROUP BY then skip nulls?
>>
>
> A while ago, I came to the conclusion that applying logic to extrapolate
> the behavior of NULL is a bad idea:
>
> http://thoughts.davisjeff.com/2009/08/02/what-is-the-deal-with-nulls/
>
> Jose was not wrong about the inconsistency between UNIQUE and GROUP BY.
> But the answer is that "we do it that way because the standard says so".
> And that's a good reason.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>
>
The article pointed by Jeff is very insightful.
NULLs, if you know them, avoid them :-(
I agree with Date and Darwen about NULLs:
"Chris Date and Hugh Darwen the authors of The Third Manifesto, have
suggested that the SQL Null implementation is inherently flawed and
should be ELIMINATED altogether^
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_%28SQL%29#cite_note-3rdmanifesto-16>
, pointing to inconsistencies and flaws in the implementation of SQL
Null-handling (particularly in aggregate functions) as proof that the
entire concept of Null is flawed and should be removed from the
relational model"
j
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | pgagarinov | 2012-06-05 12:07:37 | Re: Calling xlst_process with certain arguments causes server crash |
Previous Message | jeremie.thomassey | 2012-06-05 07:15:22 | BUG #6675: Box overlap with infinity edge |