[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgresql-general
Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Nulls, arrays, records, IS NULL, IS DISTINCT FROM
From:       Tom Lane <tgl () sss ! pgh ! pa ! us>
Date:       2006-09-29 17:24:15
Message-ID: 17789.1159550655 () sss ! pgh ! pa ! us
[Download RAW message or body]

David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:53:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In particular, the spec says
>>	ROW(1,2,NULL) IS NOT NULL
>> is false, because the row fields must be *all* not null to make it true.

> That's odd because as I understand the above,
>     ROW(1,2,NULL) IS NULL
> is also false.  Have I misunderstood?

Yup, they are both false.  The spec goes to some trouble to make it
clear that IS NULL/IS NOT NULL are not inverses for row values:

            NOTE 135 - For all R, "R IS NOT NULL" has the same result as
            "NOT R IS NULL" if and only if R is of degree 1. Table 16,
            "<null predicate> semantics", specifies this behavior.

What I find odd is the lack of comparable language about arrays.

			regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
       match
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]