On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:12 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> wrote:
> On Nov 8, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
>> 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".
>
> (exclusion constraints)++
Out of curiosity, is this feature at all similar to SQL assertions?
What would we be missing to turn this into them?
--
greg
