X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 229C73A5F71 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:47:06 +0000 (GMT) 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 38269-03 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:47:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 474C73A5F6F for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 18:47:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iB6Il04p005106; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:47:00 -0500 (EST) To: Alvaro Nunes Melo Cc: PostgreSQL - SQL Subject: Re: Set Returning Function problem In-reply-to: <1102356404.7459.10.camel@localhost> References: <1102356404.7459.10.camel@localhost> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Nunes Melo message dated "Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:06:44 -0200" Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:47:00 -0500 Message-ID: <5105.1102358820@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.002 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200412/40 X-Sequence-Number: 19660 Alvaro Nunes Melo writes: > I noticed what i think is a weird behaviour with SRFs. When I use them > in a SELECT clause, and the SRF returns no rows, the query returns no > rows too, when I think it should return an a null column. Why would you think that? The behavior is exactly right as-is. regards, tom lane