From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Scott Bailey <artacus(at)comcast(dot)net>, hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Range types |
Date: | 2009-12-14 19:42:01 |
Message-ID: | 1260819721.13414.46.camel@monkey-cat.sm.truviso.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 14:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > We can ask the user to provide a prior() and next() function, and if
> > they aren't provided, we assume it's continuous.
>
> Well, that still leaves us with the problem that Joe Schmo will file
> a bug when "create function next(float4) returns float4 as
> $$ select $1 + 0.00001 $$" doesn't behave sanely for him. I'd prefer
> not to leave it to the user to decide whether a type is discrete or
> not. The traffic on pgsql-bugs is convincing evidence that a very
> large fraction of our user-base doesn't understand that floats are
> inexact :-(
I don't know how we can decide such a thing. Do you have any ideas?
Perhaps we can compromise and restrict the support functions to C? That
might be a high-enough wall, and of course it would keep non-superusers
from confusing the underlying mechanism.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bernd Helmle | 2009-12-14 19:42:56 | Re: [patch] executor and slru dtrace probes |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-14 19:39:28 | Re: Range types |