Re: Comments on Exclusion Constraints and related datatypes
Kevin Grittner <kevin.grittner@wicourts.gov>
From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 2010-03-22T16:01:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> wrote: > Yes, for most people touching != overlap. So it just looks like a > bug. A quick search of the web turned up a definition of overlap in geometry as meaning that two polygons share at least one *internal* point, which would be consistent with your interpretation; but there is the issue of breaking existing code. Perhaps people are now accustomed to following the existing overlaps test with a test that the area of intersection is non-zero? Anyway, based on what I found, we should document the current behavior, as the term in PostgreSQL doesn't seem to match the conventional definition in geometry. -Kevin