From: | PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | knz(at)thaumogen(dot)net |
Subject: | BUG #15297: Irregular comparison rules for NULLs in tuples |
Date: | 2018-07-26 13:35:27 |
Message-ID: | 153261212701.1395.18260320763646237974@wrigleys.postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 15297
Logged by: kena
Email address: knz(at)thaumogen(dot)net
PostgreSQL version: 10.4
Operating system: FreeBSD + Linux
Description:
The SQL standard mandates ternary logic for values that involve NULL, where
NULL means "unknown".
This works in many cases correctly in pg:
"select NULL in (1,2)" -> returns NULL, correct
"select (1, NULL::int) in ((1, 1), (1, 2))" -> returns NULL, correct
"select 1 < NULL" -> returns NULL, correct
"select (1, NULL::int) > (1, 2)" -> returns NULL, correct
However as soon as a tuple/composite value contains itself composites, the
rule is not obeyed any more recursively:
"select (1, (1, NULL::int)) in ((1, (1, 0)), (1, (1, 2)))" -> returns false
!?
"select (1, (1, NULL::int)) > (1, (1, 2))" -> returns true !?
Is this intended behavior? If so, where is it documented?
If not documented, any suggestion as to how to work around it?
Thanks in advance,
--
Raphael 'kena' Poss
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2018-07-26 13:43:06 | BUG #15298: Array-array comparisons when arrays contain NULLs |
Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2018-07-26 10:26:31 | BUG #15296: Not able to get query result "information_schema.constraint_column_usage" |