> From Andreas' comments, it seems that for his application he would like
> a different behavior, but frankly I'm not certain why the current
> behavior would be detrimental in the use case he mentioned. If SQL92
> requires that any query with "= NULL" be rejected as illegal
You don't mean me, no ? My comment was intended to give an argument *for*
allowing "= NULL" to behave like "IS NULL", by saying that the "= NULL"
syntax is not defined directly (which Tom Ivar corrected), and would thus
only be an extension.
Tom Lane on the other hand said, that the standard only states NULL as a
constant for a comparison when properly cast to a datatype.
Andreas