Re: WIP: RangeTypes

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP: RangeTypes
Date: 2011-01-28 18:41:35
Message-ID: A217BFF8-8E8B-4056-954E-15FE5D7D2985@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Jan 28, 2011, at 9:48 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 09:17 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
>> For consistency, and in order not to continue our atrocious naming
>> tradition, I'd like to propose that the above be named timestamprange
>> (tsrange for short) and timestamptzrange (tstzrange for short).
>
> No real objection, but I'd like to see if someone else will second it.

+1 in principal. I think we should try to avoid the user of the term "period" if possible, and I see definite benefits to a simple model of $typename . 'range';

> Keep in mind that it's fairly easy for people to add their own range
> types. The most difficult part is defining the "canonical" function if
> it is applicable, and the "subtype_float" function which is necessary
> for GiST.

Is there GIN support? GIN seems to be the preferred index type for this sort of thing, no?

Best,

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-28 18:42:43 Re: FPI
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-01-28 18:36:45 Re: FPI