Re: Wrong result for comparing ROW(...) with IS NOT NULL

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Wolfgang Walther <walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Wrong result for comparing ROW(...) with IS NOT NULL
Date: 2023-11-13 20:21:14
Message-ID: ZVKFOkIf39yXyLZk@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 07:38:47PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Also, nothing in 9.2 precludes composite and row constructor comparisons from
> > being included there, and the intro material suggests that they probably should
> > be.  That we cover the details of (composite IS DISTINCT FROM composite) in
> > 9.24 instead of 9.2 should be noted in 9.2 somewhere and a link to 9.24
> > provided.
> >
> > I do agree with changing the identifier to be more unique but I don't know if
> > it is this simple.
>
> In reviewing this three-year-old email, I developed the attached patch
> which I think captures what David suggested above.

Patch applied to master.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Only you can decide what is important to you.

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2023-11-13 20:30:54 BUG #18194: Missing install instructions
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2023-11-13 20:13:56 Re: BUG #18179: Cluster History Error