X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C5F11F6712 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:47:38 -0300 (ADT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Score: 0.127 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.127 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.127] Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rwBYev8nQguD for ; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:47:26 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C7CE11F66EF for ; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:47:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3ALlRb9000922; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:47:27 -0400 (EDT) To: Neil Harkins cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: concatenation with a null column (using ||) nulls the result? In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Neil Harkins message dated "Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:36:47 -0700" Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:47:26 -0400 Message-ID: <921.1144705646@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200604/66 X-Sequence-Number: 24875 Neil Harkins writes: > Is this standard SQL behavior? Yes. SQL92 6.13 , general rule 2: 2) If is specified, then let S1 and S2 be the re- sult of the and , respectively. a) If either S1 or S2 is the null value, then the result of the is the null value. ... regards, tom lane