Paul,
> Search google and you should find plenty of articles discussing various
> approaches to this requirement. Here's a sample Where clause that works
> for both null and non-null arguments:
Yeah, I searched a bit but wasn't coming up with anything useful so far.
> Where (@city Is Null Or @city = Address.city)
Unfortunately, that won't cut it. If @City is not NULL, then records with
City IS NULL should not be returned. It's like I want to say WHERE
City=@City, but, if @City is NULL, then it doesn't work like I'd expect it
to.
Thanks.

Signature
Jonathan Wood
SoftCircuits Programming
http://www.softcircuits.com
>> I've written a stored procedure and would like to filter the results
>> returned based on the argument. It works so far, but I'd also like to
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>>
>> Does anyone know a trick to make this work? Thanks.
bruce barker - 30 Apr 2008 06:38 GMT
thats because in set theory the empty set (null) does not equal another
empty set. you can use the coalesce function:
where coalesce(@city,address.city,'') = coalesce(address.city,'')
-- bruce (sqlwork.com)
> Paul,
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Thanks.
Jonathan Wood - 30 Apr 2008 21:13 GMT
bruce,
> thats because in set theory the empty set (null) does not equal another
> empty set. you can use the coalesce function:
Yeah, I kind of figured that out. Just trying to find an easy workaround.
> where coalesce(@city,address.city,'') = coalesce(address.city,'')
I'm just trying to understand this. Can you explain why it wouldn't just be:
WHERE COALESCE(@city,'') = coalesce(address.city,'')
To the extent I understand it (not that much), it seems like your version
might produce a false match if @city is null, but address.city is not.
Thanks.

Signature
Jonathan Wood
SoftCircuits Programming
http://www.softcircuits.com
Mark Fitzpatrick - 30 Apr 2008 08:00 GMT
just take it a step further then
WHERE @City is null OR ((@City is not null) AND (@City = Address.city))
That way it's either null, or it's not null and it matches the city field.
Hope this helps,
Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft MVP - Expression
> Paul,
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>>>
>>> Does anyone know a trick to make this work? Thanks.
Mark Rae [MVP] - 30 Apr 2008 14:05 GMT
> just take it a step further then
>
> WHERE @City is null OR ((@City is not null) AND (@City = Address.city))
>
> That way it's either null, or it's not null and it matches the city field.
Bruce has provided the correct method for this i.e. to use the COALESCE
function.

Signature
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net
Jonathan Wood - 30 Apr 2008 21:18 GMT
Well, now that's starting to get a little convoluted. But, unless I'm
missing something, it would not detect the case where @City is NULL and
Address.City is not NULL. In this case, there should be no match. It would
probably need to be even a bit more convoluted.

Signature
Jonathan Wood
SoftCircuits Programming
http://www.softcircuits.com
> just take it a step further then
>
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know a trick to make this work? Thanks.
Paul Shapiro - 30 Apr 2008 14:18 GMT
If @city is not null, then a null Address.city will not satisfy either part
of the Where clause. @city=Address.city will be false if Address.city is
null. Try it and you'll see it works. I guess I should add that I'm using
SQL Server 2005 and it works correctly there. I know it has worked in
earlier SQL Server versions, and should work in any db, but I haven't tested
it elsewhere.
Bruce suggested Where coalesce(@city, address.city, "") =
coalesce(address.city, '') which would also work. The disadvantage to this
format is it cannot use an index on Address.city if one exists, since both
sides of the expression are functions. Even without an index I would expect
the first form to run a little faster since it doesn't have to evaluate any
functions.
> Paul,
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>>>
>>> Does anyone know a trick to make this work? Thanks.