From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Nulls, arrays, records, IS NULL, IS DISTINCT FROM |
Date: | 2006-09-29 17:24:15 |
Message-ID: | 17789.1159550655@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:53:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In particular, the spec says
>> ROW(1,2,NULL) IS NOT NULL
>> is false, because the row fields must be *all* not null to make it true.
> That's odd because as I understand the above,
> ROW(1,2,NULL) IS NULL
> is also false. Have I misunderstood?
Yup, they are both false. The spec goes to some trouble to make it
clear that IS NULL/IS NOT NULL are not inverses for row values:
NOTE 135 - For all R, "R IS NOT NULL" has the same result as
"NOT R IS NULL" if and only if R is of degree 1. Table 16,
"<null predicate> semantics", specifies this behavior.
What I find odd is the lack of comparable language about arrays.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-29 17:32:44 | Re: a little doubr about domains and pl/python |
Previous Message | Paul B. Anderson | 2006-09-29 17:08:15 | Re: Array assignment behavior (was Re: Stored procedure array |