Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (davinci.ethosmedia.com [209.10.40.250]) by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f57FrQE78953 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:53:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from josh@agliodbs.com) Received: from [209.10.40.250] (account ) by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 3.4.1) with HTTP id 68600 for ; Thu, 07 Jun 2001 08:53:21 -0700 From: "Josh Berkus" Subject: Re: behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. Standards To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.3.4.1 Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 08:53:21 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6689.991880382@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200106/104 X-Sequence-Number: 3323 Tom, >Microsoft Access is the guilty party, IIRC. I recently tried to stir > up > some interest in changing this behavior back to the standard, but > apparently there are still too many people using broken versions of > Access. Which verison? I work with MSAccess 97 a lot, and the supported syntax is "IS NULL". > A compromise answer might be to offer a SET variable that selects the > Microsoft-compatible misimplementation. Would that fly? Sounds good to me. By default, I'd like to see "=NULL" turned OFF, as I've been writing my SQL on the idea that "=NULL" will return NULL, and if "=NULL" starts returning a value it's going to screw several things up ... -Josh ______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________ Josh Berkus Complete information technology josh@agliodbs.com and data management solutions (415) 565-7293 for law firms, small businesses fax 621-2533 and non-profit organizations. San Francisco