> Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> No, I think it should *only* substitute for NULL.  Why assume
> >> zero is special?
> 
> > As I remember this is how SERIAL works in Informix. 
> 
> Ah.  OK, if that's what they do then I agree we ought to act the same.
I hope that this wasn't to say that the SERIAL should substitute for 0
as well as NULL.  That would be quite annoying.  I say stick to NULL.
If all the other DB's in the world want to shoot themselves in the foot
I don't think we should follow their example.

Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:49:40 -0600
"Jackson, DeJuan" <djackson@cpsgroup.com>
RE: [HACKERS] DROPping tables with SERIALs 