| From: | "Brandon Aiken" <BAiken(at)winemantech(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: IN clause | 
| Date: | 2006-11-24 14:32:31 | 
| Message-ID: | F8E84F0F56445B4CB39E019EF67DACBA3C4BFA@exchsrvr.winemantech.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
Hasn't it been said enough?  Don't allow NULLs in your database.
Databases are for storing data, not a lack of it.  The only time NULL
should appear is during outer joins.
--
Brandon Aiken
CS/IT Systems Engineer
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Martijn van
Oosterhout
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 7:20 AM
To: surabhi.ahuja
Cc: A. Kretschmer; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] IN clause
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 05:31:07PM +0530, surabhi.ahuja wrote:
> That is fine 
> but what I was actually expecting is this
> if 
> select * from table where col_name in (null, 'a', 'b');
> 
> to return those rows where col_name is null or if it = a or if it is =
b
>  
> But i think in does not not support null queries , am i right?
You'll need to check the standard, but IN() treats NULL specially, I
think it returns NULL if any of the elements is null, or something like
that. It certainly doesn't work the way you think it does.
Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability
to litigate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Allison | 2006-11-24 14:54:27 | indexes | 
| Previous Message | William Leite Araújo | 2006-11-24 13:32:09 | Re: How to clone a table so that primay and foreign keys remain |