Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-10-11T16:09:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Replace the "New Linear" GiST split algorithm for boxes and points with a
- 7f3bd86843e5 9.2.0 cited
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 06:28 -0700, David Fetter wrote: >> > Certainly not the end of the world, but is the convenience of being >> > able to write somerange(a, b) instead of somerange(a, b, '[)') >> > really worth it? I kind of doubt that... >> >> You're making a persuasive argument for the latter based solely on the >> clarity. If people see that 3rd element in the DDL, or need to >> provide it, it's *very* obvious what's going on. > > That was how I originally thought, but we're also providing built-in > range types like tsrange and daterange. I could see how if the former > excluded the endpoint and the latter included it, it could be confusing. > > We could go back to having different constructor names for different > inclusivity; e.g. int4range_cc(1,10). That at least removes the > awkwardness of typing (and seeing) '[]'. The cure seems worse than the disease. What is so bad about '[]'? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company