Re: [BUGS] (null) != (null) ?
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Todd Vierling <tv@pobox.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-bugs@postgreSQL.org
Date: 1999-10-26T16:48:05Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
> On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Tom Lane wrote: > > : > Both "fieldname" definitions are identical (verified with char(2) and > : > varchar(100) in particular), and both tables contain a row with a "null" in > : > that field. However, the results don't contain the row with the "null" > : > value. > : > : NULL = NULL does not yield TRUE, it yields NULL. For that matter, > : NULL != NULL does not yield FALSE --- it yields NULL. This is a > : basic consequence of the semantics of NULL. > > !? > > I have been using such constructs on commercial databases for ages. Do you > have a link to a web-based SQL standard transcription that I could look this > up? (I'll check up on exactly which database(s) I can use this type of > construct when I get back to work tomorrow....) > > It seems _extremely_ counter-intuitive, especially in cases where both > fields are in fact the same type. But NULL is unknown. How do you know they are equal if both values are unknown? -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026