Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- From: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
- To: Marcus Engene <mengpg(at)engene(dot)se>
- Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 21:38:25 +0900
- Message-id: <7DF53811-C757-4F1C-9FFE-44D227AF3CD2(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
On Nov 24, 2005, at 21:21 , Marcus Engene wrote:
When we're having an alias discussion, I'd really like to see NVL in postgres. Not because of porting from oracle as much as just spelling that without the reference manual is completely impossible.
NVL: what a very unfortunate spelling. (NULL VaLue? NULL Valued Logic? Named Very Loosely? Someone help me here :) ) AFAICT, COALESCE is SQL standard, while NVL isn't. I think an index entry might be a good idea.
Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- From: Bruce Momjian
- Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
- Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- References:
- NVL vs COALESCE
- From: Marcus Engene
- NVL vs COALESCE
- Prev by Date: Re: POWER vs. POW ???
- Next by Date: Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- Previous by thread: NVL vs COALESCE
- Next by thread: Re: NVL vs COALESCE
- Indexes: