Re: Range Types: empty ranges

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Range Types: empty ranges
Date: 2011-02-11 20:14:41
Message-ID: AANLkTi=+23qFia_hZy=XAUUrC7eAe0SR8JbDCqf3VWU7@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Well, there is a certain amount of localized clarity, I will agree with
> that. The complexity comes when you accidentally rely on some
> transformation which seems logically sound, but could result in a
> transient empty range, which then throws an error.

But by this argument you also need to support discontiguous ranges, don't you?

I mean, if you want to insist that A intersect B has to still be a
legal range, what about A union B?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-02-11 20:15:55 Re: ALTER EXTENSION UPGRADE, v3
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2011-02-11 20:14:33 Re: Range Types: empty ranges