Re: comparing NEW and OLD (any good this way?)

From: Jasen Betts <jasen(at)xnet(dot)co(dot)nz>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: comparing NEW and OLD (any good this way?)
Date: 2009-07-29 13:15:27
Message-ID: h4pi1f$pi$3@reversiblemaps.ath.cx
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 2009-07-23, Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 01:45:36PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> http://www.postgres.cz/index.php/PostgreSQL_SQL_Tricks
>
> Just had a quick flick through your list and one of the early ones stuck
> out:
>
> http://www.postgres.cz/index.php/PostgreSQL_SQL_Tricks#Attention_on_IS_NULL_and_IS_NOT_NULL_operators_for_composite_types
>
> is scary; even worse is that it was changed to be like this in 8.2
> because the standard says it should behave this way. What on earth were
> they thinking when they defined the standard this way?

since any comparson involving those tuples will return NULL true is the
correct value for IS NULL

if you are bothered by this behavior you are misusing NULL.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jasen Betts 2009-07-29 13:20:13 Re: Content-Type in form variables
Previous Message mzhang 2009-07-29 13:05:37 org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: PANIC: could not write to log file