Eugen Konkov <kes-kes(at)yandex(dot)ru> writes:
> if you allow I will suggest to map/convert 'infinity' value to
> unbound range, for datatypes which defines 'infinity' value.
That was intentionally rejected in the original range types design,
and even if we thought that decision was wrong, it's too late to
change it now.
There's probably some merit in having the documentation avoid the
use of "infinity" when it really means "unbounded", but I'm not
sure we can avoid it altogether without being obscure.
regards, tom lane