X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D84FDA5ED
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:47:34 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 30216-01
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:47:30 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from smtp02.syd.iprimus.net.au (smtp02.syd.iprimus.net.au
	[210.50.76.196])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9A4EDA5D9
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:47:30 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [210.50.200.61] (210.50.200.61) by smtp02.syd.iprimus.net.au
	(7.2.065.1) id 43023B05016A30FE; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:46:55 +1000
Message-ID: <4356B00C.2040702@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:43:56 +1000
From: David Dick <david_dick@iprimus.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-AU; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511
X-Accept-Language: en-au, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Havasv=F6lgyi_Ott=F3?= <h.otto@freemail.hu>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: NULL in IN clause
References: <00cc01c5d00b$3a67dc70$1102a8c0@dream>
	<1129681803.15546.21.camel@state.g2switchworks.com>
	<001a01c5d4ea$243a1830$6400a8c0@OTTO>
In-Reply-To: <001a01c5d4ea$243a1830$6400a8c0@OTTO>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.557 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.311,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST=1.376, DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS=0.492]
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200510/226
X-Sequence-Number: 23079

As i understand it, the use of NULL in SQL means the value of the column =

is unknown.  Therefore that result would seem fair.

Havasv=F6lgyi Ott=F3 wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> I have just run this command on 8.0.4 :
>=20
> SELECT 'foo' WHERE 0 NOT IN (NULL, 1);
>=20
> And it resulted is zero rows.
> Without NULL it is OK.
> Is this a bug, or the standard has such a rule?
>=20
> Best Regards,
> Otto
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------=
-
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>=20
>               http://archives.postgresql.org
>=20