From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan@nsd.ca>
Cc: Michael S. Tibbetts <mtibbetts@head-cfa.cfa.harvard.edu>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: min() and NaN
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 02:09:09 -0400
Message-ID: <4074.1058854149@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200307220134.h6M1Yhr09877@candle.pha.pa.us>
References: <200307220134.h6M1Yhr09877@candle.pha.pa.us>
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Is this a TODO?
It'll only take ten minutes to make it a DONE, once we figure out what
the behavior ought to be. So far I think both Stephan and I argued that
MIN/MAX ought to treat NaN as larger than all ordinary values, for
consistency with the comparison operators. That was not the behavior
Michael wanted, but I don't see that we have much choice given the
wording of the SQL spec. Does anyone want to argue against that
definition?
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, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, jllachan@nsd.ca, mtibbetts@head-cfa.cfa.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: min() and NaN
In-Reply-To: <4074.1058854149@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