| From: | Juliano Ignacio <jsignacio(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bhuvan A <bhuvansql(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: |
| Date: | 2002-03-11 20:12:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20020311201207.29010.qmail@web13502.mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Bhuvan A wrote:
> If you compare a NULL with anything you don't
> get a true value whether you're comparing with
> =, !=, <, >, etc... That's how it's defined to
> behave.
>
> where did you get this definition of behaviour!?
> is it applicable only to
> postgres or ..? its quite strange yaar!
I think that you are searching for a solution, so,
view the COALESCE SQL function in PostgreSQL
documentation. It will help you in your compares.
Juliano S. Ignacio
jsignacio(at)yahoo(dot)com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pgsql-bugs | 2002-03-11 21:59:08 | Bug #613: Sequence values fall back to previously checkpointed value after crash |
| Previous Message | Mozilla at Marela | 2002-03-11 17:59:31 | Critical: Pgsql inserts bad timestamp (seconds 60.00) - causes failing of backup-restore |