Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]
Date: 2009-09-27 17:08:20
Message-ID: 25486.1254071300@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I think that USING is just about as content-free as WITH in this
>> particular example --- it doesn't give you any hint about what the
>> purpose of the operator is.

> USING might be just as content-free as WITH, but USING OPERATOR seems
> clearly better, at least IMO.

It's not enough better to justify the conflict with USING opclass, IMO.

An idea that just struck me is CHECK WITH, ie

EXCLUSION (expr CHECK WITH operator)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2009-09-27 17:20:07 Re: GRANT ON ALL IN schema
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-09-27 17:02:30 Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints]