Re: Proposal - temporal contrib module

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Scott Bailey <artacus(at)comcast(dot)net>, hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal - temporal contrib module
Date: 2009-11-02 09:12:33
Message-ID: 87k4y9e1dq.fsf@hi-media-techno.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> If I understand what you're saying, you're alluding to a type where you
> can do things like:
> RANGE(timestamptz)
> which would be equivalent to a PERIOD.

The RANGE approach sounds so much better from here, as I have the
prefix_range example nearby... it'd be nice if it could benefit.

> Typmod almost provides enough flexibility, but it can't store a full
> OID, so we'd need to get creative. There are probably some other issues
> here as well, because the current type system isn't really designed for
> this kind of thing. Do you have any ideas or guidance here?

When talking about the extension facility it has been said PostGIS is
being creative for lacking of typmod capabilities. It could mean it's
past time for a typmod reality check?

Regards,
--
dim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bernard Grosperrin 2009-11-02 09:29:12 Re: Error on compile for Windows
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-11-02 08:25:22 Re: operator exclusion constraints