Re: Range types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Range types
Date
Msg-id 1260814471.15987.398.camel@jdavis
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Range types  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 09:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> In particular, the granularity examples you give seem to assume that
> the underlying datatype is exact not approximate --- which among other
> things will mean that it fails to work for float timestamps.  Since
> timestamps are supposedly the main use-case, that's pretty troubling.

Additionally, granularity for timestamps is not particularly useful when
you get to things like "days" and "months" which don't have a clean
algebra.

Is the granule there only to try to support continuous ranges? If so, I
don't think it's necessary if we expose the API differences I outlined
in another email in this thread. Also, that would mean that we don't
need a granule for float, because we can already treat it as discrete*.

Regards,Jeff Davis

*: nextafter() allows you to increment or decrement a double (loosely
speaking), and according to the man page it's part of C99 and
POSIX.1-2001.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Hot Standby, release candidate?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Range types