| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)[66(dot)92(dot)219(dot)49]> |
| Cc: | "Bob Smith, Hammett & Edison, Inc(dot)" <bsmith(at)h-e(dot)com>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Odd behavior with NULL value |
| Date: | 2001-12-21 03:14:32 |
| Message-ID: | 20011220191348.Y85038-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 04:24:33PM -0800,
> "Bob Smith, Hammett & Edison, Inc." <bsmith(at)h-e(dot)com> wrote:
> > See example below of using NULL values with type DATE. It behaves
> > strangely in expressions, "(x <> null)" gives an entirely different
> > result than "not(x = null)". Is this intended behavior, if so, why?
> > If not, is this a bug?
>
> There is a hack which will be off by default in 7.2 that changes
> 'x = null' into 'x is null' for compatibility with sqlserver.
As a note, I think it was actually for some feature of Access. :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bob Smith, Hammett & Edison, Inc. | 2001-12-21 03:45:51 | Re: Odd behavior with NULL value |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-12-21 02:55:18 | Re: Odd behavior with NULL value |