Message-ID: <3B1F9266.EEE2D1F0@summersault.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 09:40:40 -0500
From: Mark Stosberg <mark@summersault.com>
Reply-To: mark@summersault.com
Organization: Summersault
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. Standards
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106062007340.18894-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Stephan Szabo wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> > > Yes, column = NULL should *never* return true according to the spec (it
> > > should always return NULL in fact as stated).  The reason for breaking
> > > with the spec is AFAIK to work with broken microsoft clients that seem to
> > > think that =NULL is a meaningful test and generate queries using that.

> I'd rather have the default be the spec correct behavior
> and let people configure their server to follow the misinterpretation.

I like that idea as well. Someone like me who didn't know that this
feature was in there for M$ could have assumed it _was_ standard
behavior, and started using it as a habit. Then when I started porting
my code to another database, I'd have an extra surprise in for me. :) 

Rather than being an option targeted at just this piece of grammer,
perhaps it could a piece of a potentially larger option of "stricter
standards compliance." I realize there are a number of useful extensions
to the SQL standard in Postgres (which I like and use.), but it seems
like there would be uses for minimizing non-standard behavior, as well. 

Thank you all for your contributions to Postgres-- I use it everyday. :) 

  -mark

http://mark.stosberg.com/