On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 22:03 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Don't think that name is very useful either... sounds like you want to
> exclude operators, which is why I got lost in the first place. I'd call
> them "generic exclusion constraints" or "user-defined exclusion
> constraints". Sorry for this.
Either of those names are fine with me, too. The current name is a
somewhat shortened version of the name "operator-based exclusion
constraints", so we can also just use that name. Or, just "exclusion
constraints".
I'll leave the current patch as-is for now, and wait for some reviewer
comments. This is purely a documentation issue, so there are bound to be
a few of these things that I can clarify at once.
Regards,Jeff Davis
