Re: Range types

From: tomas(at)tuxteam(dot)de
To: hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Range types
Date: 2009-12-15 05:26:09
Message-ID: 20091215052609.GA15629@tomas
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 01:32:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

[...]

> (Also, stuff like strings simply doesn't have any sane concept of a
> unique next or previous value.

If you are willing to limit the length, then yes, you could consider
them discrete too, but...

> I think the number of types that are
> really discrete in this sense is very small, like maybe just ints and
> enums.)

...I do agree that ranges over continuous types are the more
"interesting"[1] (and possibly more useful) beast.

- ---------
[11] Unfortunaltel they could turn out to be "interesting" in the sense
of "may you live in interresting times" ;-)

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLJx3xBcgs9XrR2kYRAn10AJ9f/MQiz45LS7ogsRmMXpawcOWSfgCggkWG
gFev/SS09O+IOO+FB3shav0=
=KwxB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2009-12-15 05:30:15 Re: pgAdmin III: timestamp displayed in what time zone?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-15 04:57:57 Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS