Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor
Date: 2011-09-19 13:33:29
Message-ID: CA+TgmobkWFBw6S7AC1h3YW4zugm4zBYu5bE9jgORq77TNrgj7g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
>> select '[ 2 , NULL )'::int4range;
>> ERROR:  NULL range boundaries are not supported
>> LINE 1: select '[ 2 , NULL )'::int4range;
>
> I think this might require more opinions. There is a trade-off here
> between convenience and confusion: accepting NULL is convenient in the
> constructors, because it avoids the need to have extra constructors just
> for unbounded ranges; but could lead to confusion between NULL and INF
> (which are not the same).

I agree with this line of reasoning. I think we will be making pain
for ourselves if we need to invent a bunch more constructors just to
have a way of indicating an unbounded range, but OTOH I don't see any
compelling reason why the type input function needs to accept N-U-L-L.

--
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 Thom Brown 2011-09-19 13:41:06 Re: CUDA Sorting
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-09-19 13:30:22 Re: Improve lseek scalability v3