First - thank you. I want to again thank this list, which in general is the most
tolerant to people new to database use and theory in general, and me in
particular. I mostly got your point from an earlier answer. Hopeful your example
quashes my ignorance, relative to NULL at least.
I think I under
Hi!
Just some explicit addition:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[[...]]
So in the following query:
select * from new_payments where closed<>1;
it is desired that null=1. DeMorgan's law takes a vacation here.
You use two-valued logic here, where statements are either "true" or
"false". (DeMorg
Thanks Martijn - that is a clear explanation of the philosophy. I did not get it
from the examples and the manual.
Doug
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> Hello Doug,
>
>
> > My question question from MySQL 4.0.22: is it okay that a null interger
> > tests as
> > equal to any value. I
Hello Doug,
> My question question from MySQL 4.0.22: is it okay that a null interger
tests as
> equal to any value. I am not sure the table structure matters but in case
it is
> I included it.
>
> I did not expect that null was not not-equal to 1. Cursory testing seems
to
> indicate that a null
Belay my comments on true and false. I got mixed up. That works as documented.
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Roger Baklund wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I did not expect that null was not not-equal to 1.
>
> Any comparison with NULL returns NULL:
>
> mysql> select null<>1,null>1,null<1,null=1;
> +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks but I still do not get why this does not merit a, "you might want to
think about this".
So in the following query:
select * from new_payments where closed<>1;
it is desired that null=1. DeMorgan's law takes a vacation here.
Correct behavior, in that it is a fe
Thanks but I still do not get why this does not merit a, "you might want to
think about this".
So in the following query:
select * from new_payments where closed<>1;
it is desired that null=1. DeMorgan's law takes a vacation here.
Correct behavior, in that it is a feature, I expected that; des
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did not expect that null was not not-equal to 1.
Any comparison with NULL returns NULL:
mysql> select null<>1,null>1,null<1,null=1;
+-++++
| null<>1 | null>1 | null<1 | null=1 |
+-++++
|NULL | NULL
My question question from MySQL 4.0.22: is it okay that a null interger tests as
equal to any value. I am not sure the table structure matters but in case it is
I included it.
I did not expect that null was not not-equal to 1. Cursory testing seems to
indicate that a null integer field is not not-
