| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, cdalxndr(at)yahoo(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15166: PL/PGSQL default rowtype variable value is null but also not null |
| Date: | 2018-04-21 15:14:36 |
| Message-ID: | 19263.1524323676@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> That could be considered a slight bug in the documentation, because what
> actually happens for rowtype variables is that they are initialized to a
> row value with all null columns, NOT to the null value.
Right, if they're declared as a named composite type rather than RECORD.
> Also, it looks like this behavior changes in pg11, probably not
> intentionally.
For the record, it was entirely intentional, cf
https://postgr.es/m/8962.1514399547@sss.pgh.pa.us
As of commit 4b93f5799, both named-composite and RECORD variables
are initialized to simple NULLs, not ROW(NULL,NULL,...).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Сергей | 2018-04-22 04:28:09 | postgres 10.3 no response |
| Previous Message | Alex | 2018-04-21 07:51:37 | Re: BUG #15166: PL/PGSQL default rowtype variable value is null but also not null |