| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Range Types, constructors, and the type system |
| Date: | 2011-06-29 21:44:53 |
| Message-ID: | 1309383893.4921.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On ons, 2011-06-29 at 10:15 -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:13 AM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>
> > Because there might be more than one range type for a
> > base type. Say there are two range types over text, one
> > with collation 'de_DE' and one with collation 'en_US'.
> > What would the type of
> > range('foo', 'foooo')
> > be?
>
> The one that corresponds to the current LC_COLLATE setting.
Yes, or more generally, we have logic that determines, for example, what
collation to use for
'foo' < 'foooo'
The same logic can be used to determine what collation to use for
range('foo', 'foooo')
(In fact, if you implement range() as a user-space function, that will
happen automatically.)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-29 22:16:20 | Re: Re: starting to review the Extend NOT NULL representation to pg_constraint patch |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-06-29 21:28:33 | Re: default privileges wording |