Re: empty text fields

From: Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: empty text fields
Date: 2006-06-28 19:33:18
Message-ID: 20060628193318.GG6400@merkur.hilbert.loc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 06:25:22PM +0200, Leif B. Kristensen wrote:

> >> event_date CHAR(18) NOT NULL DEFAULT

> The event_date field is a "fuzzy date" construct. It will allow the
> storage of such dates as "1784", "ca. 1810", "May 1852", "1798 or
> 1799", "between 1820 and 1830" and so on. It's very useful in
> historical research to handle such dates meaningfully.
How and where do you handle the fuzziness of it ? In the
application ? We have to deal with the same thing in medical
history data and haven't yet satisfactorily solved it.

> By the way, I was also going to ask sometime if there's a better way to
> handle such a construct than an unspecified CHAR(18) column.

A composite type comes to mind. Tagged types (google for
"tagged_type") would probably help, too.

A "full-blown" implementation of a fuzzy timestamp type which

a) preserves the input/update timestamp
b) allows setting the accuracy of the value per row
c) allows for known "modifiers" and "terms" ("mid-summer", "second half of ...")
d) allows for an arbitrary textual addition ("ca.", "probably")

would be great. I know I should be helping to write one
instead of hoping someone does it for me. But I lack the
expertise to do it properly. I am willing to help, at any
rate, though.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karsten Hilbert 2006-06-28 19:49:20 Re: empty text fields
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-06-28 19:20:49 Re: Strange Behavior with Serializable Transcations