Re: "IS NOT NULL" != "NOT NULL" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: "IS NOT NULL" != "NOT NULL"
Date
Msg-id 200201200032.g0K0WtT18841@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "IS NOT NULL" != "NOT NULL"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
> I've been told that Oracle fails to distinguish empty strings from
> NULL, which if true is a clear violation of the SQL specification.
> If you're used to Oracle then that might help explain your confusion :-(
>
> Another problem is that SQL's boolean operations act as though NULL
> is the logical value UNKNOWN, rather than explicitly setting up a
> boolean datatype with the three allowed values TRUE, FALSE, UNKNOWN.
> While the rules for propagation of NULL happen to be similar to the
> results that logic dictates you get for UNKNOWN, this is still a kind
> of type pun, and it doesn't help to reduce the confusion any.

My book does deal with this NULL distinction:

    http://www.postgresql.org/docs/awbook.html

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@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

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: "IS NOT NULL" != "NOT NULL"
Next
From: Masaru Sugawara
Date:
Subject: Re: failure to always use index on similar databases with eual queries