On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:37 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Instead of calling these generalized index constraints, I wonder if we
>> oughtn't to be calling them something like "don't-overlap constraints"
>> (that's a bad name, but something along those lines). They're not
>> really general at all, except compared to uniqueness constraints (and
>> they aren't called generalized unique-index constraints, just
>> generalized index constraints).
>
> What they should be called is generalized unique constraints, without
> reference to "index". Because what they generalize is the operator by
> which uniqueness is determined.
Well, it should eventually be possible to use this feature to create
an index which excludes overlapping ranges in fact, unless I
misunderstand, that's the principle likely use case. Which is not
unique-ness at all.
...Robert
