Re: Logical Implication

From: solai v <solai(dot)cdac(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>
Cc: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Logical Implication
Date: 2026-09-17 04:53:12
Message-ID: CAF0whueTV+FkJ+57xET8KpT7A8wBhEST6bBES53vLfXd=jgk8w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi all

I tested the IMPLIES boolean operator patch.
First, I reproduced the issue on the unpatched PostgreSQL, where using
the IMPLIES operator resulted in a syntax error. I then applied the
two patches, rebuilt PostgreSQL, and repeated the same tests.
After applying the patch, I verified the IMPLIES operator with all
TRUE/FALSE combinations and confirmed that its results match the
equivalent NOT a OR b expressions. I also tested its use in a CHECK
constraint, including both valid and invalid cases. In addition, I
tested NULL handling, right associativity, and rejection of
non-boolean operands.
All the tested cases behaved as expected. Finally, I ran the
PostgreSQL regression test suite, and all tests passed.
Overall, the patch is working as expected based on the tests performed.

Regards
solai

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2026-09-17 05:30:54 Re: ERROR: too late to create a new PlaceHolderInfo
Previous Message Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) 2026-09-17 04:49:23 table-write trigger can bypass ATPrepChangePersistence