Horton

Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor

Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>

View thread
From: Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-10-10T17:39:20Z
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 →

  1. Replace the "New Linear" GiST split algorithm for boxes and points with a

On 10 October 2011 18:31, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 12:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > The "canonicalize" function (specified at type creation time) allows you
>> > to specify the canonical output representation. So, I can change the
>> > canonical form for discrete ranges to use '[]' notation if we think
>> > that's more expected.
>>
>> What if I write '[1,INT_MAX]'::int4range?  The open-parenthesis form will
>> fail with an integer overflow.  I suppose you could canonicalize it to
>> an unbounded range, but that seems unnecessarily surprising.
>
> So, are you suggesting that I canonicalize to '[]' then? That seems
> reasonable to me, but there's still some slight awkwardness because
> int4range(1,10) would be '[1,9]'.

Why?  int4range(1,10,'[]') returns:

 int4range
-----------
 [1,11)
(1 row)

Which if corrected to display the proposed way would just be '[1,10]'.
 So the default boundaries should be '[]' as opposed to '[)' as it is
now.

-- 
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company