From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bjoern A. Zeeb <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: user defined type, plpgsql function and NULL
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 00:58:55 -0400
Message-ID: <19185.1126587535@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dforj9$9cg$1@news.germany.com>
References: <dforj9$9cg$1@news.germany.com>
"Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> writes:
> Is this correct or is it just a "works like that this time but may
> change at any time in the future"?
The meaning of a NULL for a composite value isn't real well-defined
at the moment. I tend to agree that "fbt IS NULL" should yield true
in your example, but I think there are/were some implementation reasons
why it doesn't.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net
Subject: Re: user defined type, plpgsql function and NULL
In-Reply-To: <19185.1126587535@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox