On 09/17/2015 07:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 09/17/2015 06:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Well, that's true: the parser actually looks up the operator named "<>"
for the given data types, and IS DISTINCT FROM is just a prefilter on
that to do the right thing with nulls. So because type point has an
operator that's physically named "<>", that case works.
If you use '<>' explicitly, otherwise:
test=> select '(1,2)'::point is distinct from '(1,3)'::point;
ERROR: operator does not exist: point = point
Ah, sorry, actually what IS [NOT] DISTINCT FROM looks up is the "="
operator.
So the docs should be changed?
As they stand now:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/interactive/functions-comparison.html
"For non-null inputs, IS DISTINCT FROM is the same as the <> operator. "
That did not indicate to me the '=' was important to IS DISTINCT ON.
Then again I may need more attention from the clue stick:)
The core point remains, though, that this is a name-based
lookup rather than an opclass-based one. I'd like to get us moved
over to using opclass-based lookups for all cases where the system
currently assumes that operators named "=" or "<>" necessarily behave
in a particular way. However, that would leave point and some of the
other weirder datatypes even further out in the cold than they are now.
regards, tom lane
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
