| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types |
| Date: | 2016-07-27 01:10:09 |
| Message-ID: | 7fab3f99-5d2b-75c4-633f-f8da9c24a0d3@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/26/16 7:46 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> By the way, our documentation says that NOT NULL constraints are
> equivalent to CHECK (column_name IS NOT NULL). That is what the SQL
> standard says, but in fact our NOT NULL constraints are equivalent to
> CHECK (column_name IS DISTINCT FROM NULL). Should we update the
> documentation with something like the attached?
Couldn't we just fix that instead? For NOT NULL constraints on
composite type columns, create a full CHECK (column_name IS NOT NULL)
constraint instead, foregoing the attnotnull optimization.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-07-27 01:15:33 | Re: PoC: Make it possible to disallow WHERE-less UPDATE and DELETE |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-07-27 01:00:57 | Re: Increasing timeout of poll_query_until for TAP tests |