Tom Lane wrote: > My recollection of the previous discussion is that we didn't have > consensus on what the "right" behavior is, so I'm not sure you can just > assert that this patch is right. In any case this is only touching the > tip of the iceberg. If we intend that rows of nulls should be null, > then we have got issues with, for example, NOT NULL column constraint > checks, which don't have any such recursion built into them.
FWIW if changing the behavior of NOT NULL constraints is desired, I still have the patch to catalogue them around, if anyone wants to play around. I haven't gotten around to finishing it up, yet :-( -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
