[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> So, if I use the max() aggregate, I receive one row with the value NULL. Is
> that correct?
Yup, that's what the SQL spec says to do, and it seems reasonable to me.
IIRC, the spec also says that SUM() over no rows returns NULL, which is
less reasonable --- I'd have de
Hello.
Is this a bug?
>linux=# SELECT * FROM test;
> x
>---
> 1
> 2
> 3
>(3 Rows)
>
>linux=# SELECT * FROM test WHERE FALSE;
> x
>---
>(0 Rows)
>
>phlegma=# SELECT max(x) FROM test WHERE FALSE;
> max
>-
>
>(1 Rows)
>
>phlegma=#
So, if I use the max() aggregate, I receive one row with the val
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1065
Logged by: R. Lemos
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 7.4
Operating system: Linux
Description:JDBC DataSource Serializability
Details:
The JDBC2 pooled datasource(org.postgresql.jd
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 1064
Logged by: Sergey
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 7.4
Operating system: FreeBSD
Description:work with temporary table in plpgsql function
Details:
If a followed function is calle
