Re: Range Types and extensions

From: Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Range Types and extensions
Date: 2011-06-06 05:21:20
Message-ID: 4DEC63D0.1050304@darrenduncan.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2011/6/6 Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>:
>> Jeff Davis wrote:
>>> I'd like to take another look at Range Types and whether part of it
>>> should be an extension. Some of these issues relate to extensions in
>>> general, not just range types.
>>>
>>> First of all, what are the advantages to being in core?
>
> it should be supported by FOREACH statement in PL/pgSQL

Yes, absolutely. I know this feature is loved in Perl. But this usage would
only work for a more limited range of data types, namely those over which one
can build a sequence generator, such as integers, because they have a
next-value/prev-value function defined. In other words, while range types in
general would work for any ordered type, FOREACH would only work for the subset
of those that are ordinal types. -- Darren Duncan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dan Ports 2011-06-06 05:58:08 Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2011-06-06 04:56:47 Re: Range Types and extensions