| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | anton(dot)lugovoy(dot)hopni(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #16511: Using '= all ( )' with empty table returns true |
| Date: | 2020-06-25 18:00:37 |
| Message-ID: | 2286502.1593108037@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Given table is "task" (id uuid primary key, status text not null),
> Query "select 'b' = all (select status from task where status = 'a')"
> returns true if table "task" is empty
Why do you think that's wrong? It matches usual mathematical practice,
and even if you dispute that, the SQL standard is quite explicit about it:
1) Let R be the result of the <row value constructor> and let T be
the result of the <table subquery>.
...
a) If T is empty or if the implied <comparison predicate> is
true for every row RT in T, then "R <comp op> <all> T" is
true.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2020-06-26 10:44:03 | BUG #16512: Character considered as a number by regex but can not convert to numeric |
| Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2020-06-25 17:40:04 | BUG #16511: Using '= all ( )' with empty table returns true |