Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate
Date
Msg-id 6995.945970543@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate  (sszabo@bigpanda.com)
List pgsql-hackers
sszabo@bigpanda.com writes:
>> Well, but why PgSQL ignore function result if any argument is NULL. IMHO is
>> function's problem what return, and PgSQL must use this result. 
>
> I believe this is a known issue that's being looked at right now.

Current plans are to fix it in the release-after-next (7.1).

As you say, the behavior is correct for standard SQL operators; the
only real problem is that user-written operators might want to return
non-null results for null inputs, and we can't handle that right now.

Applying COALESCE before calling the operator will get the job done
in some cases, but it clutters your queries...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Karel Zak - Zakkr
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] empty concatenate
Next
From: Adriaan Joubert
Date:
Subject: Index corruption