On Thu, 02 Jan 2003 17:19:52 -0600, "Brian Walker"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>create table test1 (name varchar(64),num1 int,num2 int);
>create unique index idx1 on test1(name,num1);
>insert into idx1 values ('row3',null,22);
>insert into idx1 values ('row3',null,23);
>
>This is allowed to happen. In Microsoft SQL the second insert will
>fail because of the unique index. This looks like in MSSQL for the
>unique index checks that NULL is equal to NULL so the unique check
>fails. In PostgreSQL NULL != NULL so the unique check passes because
>even though the name is the same the "num1" field is different..
This is just one more issue where Postgres is standard compliant and
MS is not. Your problem has been discussed before:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-novice/2002-09/msg00062.php
>Does anybody have any ideas on how I can work around this difference?
Also read the other messages of that thread; thus you should get an
idea of possible solutions.
<nitpicking>
You wrote:
>In PostgreSQL NULL != NULL
While accurate enough for the context you used it in, it is not
completely exact. NULL = NULL is neither TRUE nor FALSE, it is
UNKNOWN. The same holds for NULL != NULL. Try
SELECT * FROM anytable WHERE NULL = NULL;
SELECT * FROM anytable WHERE NULL != NULL;
to illustrate this; you get 0 rows in both cases, even in MSSQL ;-).
What's relevant here is that NULL = NULL doesn't evaluate to TRUE,
which explains why rows containing NULL cannot violate a unique
constraint.
</nitpicking>
Servus
Manfred
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
