Re: Logical Implication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From solai v
Subject Re: Logical Implication
Date
Msg-id CAF0whueTV+FkJ+57xET8KpT7A8wBhEST6bBES53vLfXd=jgk8w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Logical Implication  (Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>)
Responses Re: Logical Implication
List pgsql-hackers
Hi all

I tested the  IMPLIES boolean operator patch.
First, I reproduced the issue on the unpatched PostgreSQL, where using
the IMPLIES operator resulted in a syntax error. I then applied the
two patches, rebuilt PostgreSQL, and repeated the same tests.
After applying the patch, I verified the IMPLIES operator with all
TRUE/FALSE combinations and confirmed that its results match the
equivalent NOT a OR b expressions. I also tested its use in a CHECK
constraint, including both valid and invalid cases. In addition, I
tested NULL handling, right associativity, and rejection of
non-boolean operands.
All the tested cases behaved as expected. Finally, I ran the
PostgreSQL regression test suite, and all tests passed.
Overall, the patch is working as expected based on the tests performed.

Regards
solai



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: table-write trigger can bypass ATPrepChangePersistence
Next
From: Richard Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: too late to create a new PlaceHolderInfo