July 11, 2010 at 8:15 am
Comments posted to this topic are about the item REPLACE() and NULL
-----
a haiku...
NULL is not zero
NULL is not an empty string
NULL is the unknown
July 11, 2010 at 8:16 am
July 11, 2010 at 4:33 pm
Nice question - thanks.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
July 11, 2010 at 10:47 pm
July 11, 2010 at 11:37 pm
thnx nice one
SELECT REPLACE('Hello world',NULL, 'zzz' );
as suggested by you... even this returns the same output
July 11, 2010 at 11:54 pm
[p]I learnt new thing today. Thanks Ronmoses.[/p]
KSB
-----------------------------
Thousands of candles can be lit from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Knowledge and happiness never decreases by being shared.” - Buddha
July 12, 2010 at 1:23 am
[font="Verdana"]Goodish! simple and informative!
[/font]
July 12, 2010 at 3:11 am
Good question. i like this function. Have used it
July 12, 2010 at 5:20 am
A simple question, but a usefull one nonetheless, especially if you use the function with variables as input parameters.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
July 12, 2010 at 7:53 am
This is one of those things that can be a real gotcha if you don't know about it, and put in code to handle it ahead of time. Thanks.
July 12, 2010 at 8:05 am
Nice question.
July 12, 2010 at 9:17 am
Anyone got any ideas why this function was made to work this way? Makes no sense to me.
July 12, 2010 at 9:53 am
kevin.l.williams (7/12/2010)
Anyone got any ideas why this function was made to work this way? Makes no sense to me.
I cannot answer that authoritatively, but consider that it would make no sense to try to replace part of a string with NULL either, so perhaps the decision was made to check the types of all three parameters first before doing the matching.
--
edit: fix typo
July 12, 2010 at 10:07 am
Good question.
Also, thanks John Arnott for the explanation. It makes sense.
July 12, 2010 at 10:24 am
KevinC. (7/12/2010)
It makes sense.
Really? Would it have been too difficult to return the string unmodified if there was a NULL detected? In the way it is now, a small bug can be disastrous, potentially wiping out critical data.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply
This website stores cookies on your computer.
These cookies are used to improve your website experience and provide more personalized services to you, both on this website and through other media.
To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy