On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 21:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Louis-David Mitterrand writes:
>
> > Shouldn't plpgsql shortcut AND conditions when a previous one fails, as
> > perl does?
>
> Shouldn't perl evaluate all operands unconditionally, like plpgsql does?
>
> Seriously, if you want to change this you have to complain to the SQL
> standards committee.
Is plpgsl a SQL standards committee standard ?
and is the following non-standard ?
(itest is a 16k row test table with i in 1-16k)
hannu=# create sequence itest_seq;
CREATE
hannu=# select nextval('itest_seq');
nextval
---------
1
(1 row)
hannu=# select count(*) from itest where false and true;
count
-------
0
(1 row)
hannu=# select count(*) from itest where false and i =
nextval('itest_seq');
count
-------
0
(1 row)
hannu=# select nextval('itest_seq');
nextval
---------
2
(1 row)
hannu=# select count(*) from itest where i = nextval('itest_seq');
count
-------
0
(1 row)
hannu=# select nextval('itest_seq');
nextval
---------
16387
(1 row)
---------------------
Hannu
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
