On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 02:44:51PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "George Pavlov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > select count(*) from t2 where t2.name not in (
> > select t1.name from t1 limit 261683)
> > --> 13
> > select count(*) from t2 where t2.name not in (
> > select t1.name from t1 limit 261684)
> > --> 0
>
> > What is so magical about 261683?
>
> Most likely, the 261684'th row of t1 has a NULL value of name.
> Many people find the behavior of NOT IN with nulls unintuitive,
> but it's per SQL spec ...
>
> regards, tom lane
In 8.0 we get:
elein=# select 1 in (NULL, 1, 2);
?column?
----------
t
(1 row)
elein=# select 3 not in (NULL, 1, 2);
?column?
----------
(1 row)
For consistency, either both should return NULL or
both return true/false.
For completeness testing, the following are correct.
Select NULL in/not in any list returns NULL.
elein=# select NULL in (1,2);
?column?
----------
(1 row)
elein=# select NULL not in (1,2);
?column?
----------
(1 row)
elein=# select NULL in (NULL, 1,2);
?column?
----------
(1 row)
elein=# select NULL not in (NULL, 1,2);
?column?
----------
(1 row)
elein
--------------------------------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Varlena, LLC www.varlena.com
(510)655-2584(o) (510)543-6079(c)
PostgreSQL Consulting, Support & Training
PostgreSQL General Bits http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/
--------------------------------------------------------------
AIM: varlenallc Yahoo: AElein Skype: varlenallc
--------------------------------------------------------------
I have always depended on the [QA] of strangers.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
