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: | 2009-12-16 22:25:24 |
Message-ID: | 1261002324.13414.2428.camel@monkey-cat.sm.truviso.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 13:59 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> For example, if you're trying to do classroom scheduling, it might be
> useful to constrain the periods to start and end on hour boundaries
> --- but the next thing you'll want is to have it know that the "next"
> slot after 5pm Friday is 8am Monday. Except on holidays. And then
> there's the fact that my alma mater starts most hour-long classes on
> the half hour.
Data types are only a first-level constraint -- a domain of reasonable
values. The class isn't going to start on a fraction-of-a-minute
boundary, so it would be reasonable to reject those values early.
I never suggested that next() should be such a highly business-dependent
function as you suggest above (skipping holidays, etc); it should just
return the next value in the domain (if it's discrete).
Surely you wouldn't suggest that the ipv4 data type's next() function
should skip over addresses that aren't in a valid subnet on your
network. But you seem to think those make useful discrete ranges.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-16 22:25:33 | Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-12-16 22:20:33 | Re: Largeobject Access Controls and pg_migrator |