| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Range Types and extensions |
| Date: | 2011-06-07 17:20:49 |
| Message-ID: | 1307467249.2402.175.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 11:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > right. hm -- can you have multiple range type definitions for a
> > particular type?
>
> In principle, sure, if the type has multiple useful sort orderings.
Right. Additionally, you might want to use different "canonical"
functions for the same subtype.
> I don't immediately see any core types for which we'd bother.
Agreed.
> BTW, Jeff, have you worked out the implications of collations for
> textual range types?
Well, "it seems to work" is about as far as I've gotten.
As far as the implications, I'll need to do a little more research and
thinking. But I don't immediately see anything too worrisome.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua Berkus | 2011-06-07 17:21:26 | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2011-06-07 17:18:24 | Re: [Pgbuildfarm-members] CREATE FUNCTION hang on test machine polecat on HEAD |