| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ben <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL General ((EN))" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |
| Date: | 2007-06-30 16:06:30 |
| Message-ID: | 25954.1183219590@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anyway, there's no doubt that we can point to the behavior of MAX/MIN
>> as defense for what we made GREATEST/LEAST do, so I'm inclined to leave
>> their behavior alone, at least until such time as they're actually
>> standardized. But a note in the manual pointing out the difference from
>> Oracle seems in order.
> Agreed that we are good by following min/max. Not sure about a mention
> in the docs that we are different from Oracle helps. Do we mention
> other differences? I see us doing that only for PL/Psql.
We tend not to mention Oracle by name, but there are various places
saying that we do X while "some other databases" do Y. In view of the
mysql behavior I think I'd use that same wording here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-06-30 16:13:48 | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-06-30 15:56:30 | Re: greatest/least semantics different between oracle and postgres |