| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: comparing rows |
| Date: | 2000-08-06 01:54:27 |
| Message-ID: | 15246.965526867@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
>> Stupid question here ... but ... can't this kludge be "faked" in the ODBC
>> driver itself, vs in the server? *raised eyebrow*
> Right now, the ODBC driver does not do full parsing of the input
> queries, so imho it would be difficult to reliably identify the correct
> string substitution.
However, the ODBC driver's parsing is desperately inadequate anyway
(it fails to handle nested function calls properly). It might well be
that fixing that will entail doing enough work that "= NULL" could be
recognized without much more work.
On the third hand, pushing the kluge out to the ODBC driver doesn't make
it any less a kluge...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-08-06 02:05:21 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] random() function produces wrong range |
| Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2000-08-05 08:17:11 | Re: COALESCE implementation question |