Re: Why does the range type's upper function behave inconsistently?

Thanks everyone. I understand now. The funny thing is I read the
documentation many weeks before actually using range types for the first
time but it didn't click that the documentation was describing the behavior
I was observing, until now.

Thanks again,

Dane

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 07/05/2015 10:13 AM, Dane Foster wrote:
>
>> I don't understand the inconsistent behavior of the range types' upper
>> function in regard to inclusive ranges.
>>
>> For example(s):
>> 1. SELECT upper(int4range(1, 4, '[]')) = 4; -- FALSE
>> 2. SELECT upper(int8range(1, 4, '[]')) = 4; -- FALSE
>> 3. SELECT upper(numrange(1, 4, '[]')) = 4; -- TRUE
>> 4. SELECT upper(tstzrange('2015-07-01: 00:00:00', now(), '[]')) = now();
>> -- TRUE
>> 5. SELECT upper(daterange('2015-01-01', current_date, '[]')) =
>> current_date; -- FALSE
>>
>
> To follow up on Julien Rouhaud post, if you do:
>
> production=# select daterange('2015-01-01', current_date, '[]');
> daterange
> -------------------------
> [2015-01-01,2015-07-06)
> (1 row)
>
> see that the '[]] has been changed to '[)' with tomorrows date as the
> upper bound.
>
>
>
>> #1 & #2 are FALSE because upper returns 5 instead of 4; and #5 is FALSE
>> because upper returns: current_date + interval '1 day'. I don't
>> understand the logic behind why it would return the inclusive upper
>> bound value for some ranges and not others. If anyone can shed some
>> light on this behavior it would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> One of things I originally tried to use upper for was CHECK constraints.
>> That was until I wrote some unit tests and realized that upper doesn't
>> consistently work the way I expected. Of course my assumptions are
>> probably wrong so that's why I'm asking for clarification.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dane
>>
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
>