Re: WIP: generalized index constraints - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WIP: generalized index constraints
Date
Msg-id 19638.1253040543@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: generalized index constraints  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: WIP: generalized index constraints
List pgsql-hackers
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 13:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Uhh.... so what happens if I create an index constraint using the
>> +(integer, integer) operator?

> You can use any operator that has an index search strategy. Overlaps is
> probably the most useful, but you could imagine other operators, like a
> bi-directional containment operator (either LHS is contained in RHS, or
> vice-versa).

Does it behave sanely for operators that are non-commutative, such
as '>'?  (I'm not even very sure that I know what "sanely" would be
in such a case.)
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: generalized index constraints
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Timestamp to time_t