Re: anyelement -> anyrange

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Subject: Re: anyelement -> anyrange
Date: 2016-08-17 01:29:11
Message-ID: 9645.1471397351@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> writes:
> I can't think of any reason you'd want two different range types on a
> single element type.

We would not have built it that way if there were not clear use-cases.
An easy example is you might want both a continuous timestamp range
and one that is quantized to hour boundaries. Primarily what the
range type brings in besides the element type is a canonicalization
function; and we can't guess which one you want.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-17 01:30:57 Improve formatting of comments in plpgsql.h
Previous Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2016-08-17 01:16:02 Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres