Re: why the need for is null?

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: Baldur Norddahl <bbn-pgsql(dot)general(at)clansoft(dot)dk>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: why the need for is null?
Date: 2004-01-01 22:58:47
Message-ID: 3FF4A627.5040500@paradise.net.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

The relational model was designed using a 3 valued logic - true, false,null.

All relational database implementations will inflict this on you :-)

Not everyone is convinced that the 3 valued approach was the best way.
For some entertaining comments by Chris Date and Fabian Pascal see:

http://www.dbdebunk.citymax.com/page/page/622689.htm

best wishes

Mark

Baldur Norddahl wrote:

>Hi,
>
>How come "X=null" is not the same as "X is null"? I got a few selects with
>queries like this:
>
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2004-01-01 23:13:10 Re: why the need for is null?
Previous Message Baldur Norddahl 2004-01-01 22:53:29 Re: why the need for is null?