Re: Exclusion constraint issue

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 12:18 -0600, Eric McKeeth wrote:
>
> > This is ugly, but it does seem to enforce the constraint I need, of
> > non-overlapping dates where sharing an endpoint is not considered an
> > overlap.
>
> The period type supports different inclusivity/exclusivity combinations.
> So, the period:
>
> '[2009-01-02, 2009-01-03)'
>
> Does not overlap with:
>
> '[2009-01-03, 2009-01-04)'
>
> Because "[" or "]" means "inclusive" and "(" or ")" means "exclusive".
>

My problem wasn't with getting the period type to represent overlaps with
the correct inclusivity/exclusivity, but in getting it to work with my
exclusion constraint. Can you show an example of how I could get that
working perhaps?

> For further discussion, you can join the temporal-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org
> mailing list (sign up at
> http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/temporal-general ). If this still
> does not solve your use case, I'd like to see if it can be modified to
> do so.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>
I've subscribed to the temporal-general list, so we can move this discussion
there if that's more appropriate.

Thanks,
Eric