Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-11-01 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Jeff Davis wrote: > >> Seriously though, I think that we should stick as closely to the >> letter of the standard as possible here (or, if there is >> ambiguity, pick one reasonable interpretation). NULL semantics are >> confusing enough wit

Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-11-01 Thread Kevin Grittner
Jeff Davis wrote: > Seriously though, I think that we should stick as closely to the > letter of the standard as possible here (or, if there is > ambiguity, pick one reasonable interpretation). NULL semantics are > confusing enough without everyone making their own subtle tweaks. +1 If the s

Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-11-01 Thread Jeff Davis
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 09:44 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote: > > My take on this is that we are stuck with the status quo. If a > change > > must be done, the 'is null' change should be reverted to un-standard > > behavior. The SQL standard position on this issue is, IMNSHO, on > > mars. > > As someone w

Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-11-01 Thread Jim Nasby
On Oct 28, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Pavel Stehule writes: >>> I am checking PLpgSQL ToDo topics, and I am not sure if this topic >>> isn't done. And if not, then I would to get some detail. >> >> I think that thread petered o

Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-10-28 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Pavel Stehule writes: >> I am checking PLpgSQL ToDo topics, and I am not sure if this topic >> isn't done. And if not, then I would to get some detail. > > I think that thread petered out because we didn't have consensus on > what the behavior o

Re: [HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-10-28 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule writes: > I am checking PLpgSQL ToDo topics, and I am not sure if this topic > isn't done. And if not, then I would to get some detail. I think that thread petered out because we didn't have consensus on what the behavior ought to be. It goes back to whether there is supposed to be

[HACKERS] revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables

2010-10-28 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I am checking PLpgSQL ToDo topics, and I am not sure if this topic isn't done. And if not, then I would to get some detail. Now there is possible to test row's variable on NULL, now it is possible to assign NULL to row variable. What we can do more? a) There is small difference between ret