From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Eckermann <jeckermann(at)verio(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: RE: RE: Re: select substr??? |
Date: | 2001-04-13 18:38:48 |
Message-ID: | 5197.987187128@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Jeff Eckermann <jeckermann(at)verio(dot)net> writes:
> You are correct, the check for "$1 is null" is not required. I was
> attempting an optimisation, as in "don't do anything else if this is null".
> The gain would depend on how much further processing the function would
> attempt before recognizing that it was dealing with a null value, which is
> something that I don't know enough to tell.
In 7.1, checking for null would be appropriate unless you've declared
the function "strict". A strict function won't even be called for null
input, rather a null result will be assumed automatically --- with much
less overhead than an explicit test for null would need.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lonnie Cumberland | 2001-04-13 18:57:14 | Re: Calling plSQL functions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-04-13 18:35:49 | Re: Calling plSQL functions |