Re: range_agg

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Paul A Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: range_agg
Date: 2020-03-08 02:45:05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 06:45:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > There's another use case not yet covered here that could make this
> > even more complex, we should probably plan for it: multi-ranges
> > with weights.
> I'm inclined to reject that as completely out of scope. The core
> argument for unifying multiranges with ranges, if you ask me, is to
> make the data type closed under union. Weights are from some other
> universe.

I don't think they are. SQL databases are super useful because they do
bags in addition to sets, so set union isn't the only, or maybe even
the most important, operation over which ranges ought to be closed.

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres:

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-03-08 02:47:59 Re: Allow to_date() and to_timestamp() to accept localized names
Previous Message James Coleman 2020-03-08 02:33:40 Re: Allow to_date() and to_timestamp() to accept localized names