Re: Range Types and extensions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Florian Pflug
Subject Re: Range Types and extensions
Date
Msg-id 73795993-273D-4C15-86C2-BCDFFC255A0F@phlo.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Range Types and extensions  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Range Types and extensions
List pgsql-hackers
On Jun12, 2011, at 04:37 , Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> wrote:
>> On Jun8, 2011, at 17:46 , Jeff Davis wrote:
>>> It looks like the type input function may be a problem, because it
>>> doesn't look like it knows what the collation is yet. In other words,
>>> PG_GET_COLLATION() is zero for the type input function.
>>> 
>>> But I need to do a comparison to find out if the range is valid or not.
>>> For instance:
>>>  '[a, Z)'::textrange
>>> is valid in "en_US" but not "C".
>> 
>> Maybe that check should just be removed? If one views the range
>> '[L, U)' as a concise way of expressing "L <= x AND x < U" for some
>> x, then allowing the case L > U seems quite natural. There won't
>> be any such x of course, but the range is still valid, just empty.
>> 
>> Actually, thinking for this a bit, I believe this is the only
>> way text ranges can support collations. If the validity of a range
>> depends on the collation, then changing the collation after creation
>> seems weird, since it can make previous valid ranges invalid and
>> vice versa.
>> 
>> There could be a function RANGE_EMPTY() which people can put into
>> their CHECK constraints if they don't want such ranges to sneak
>> into their tables...
> 
> I think the collation is going to have to be baked into the type
> definition, no?  You can't just up and change the collation of the
> column as you could for a straight text column, if that might cause
> the contents of some rows to be viewed as invalid.

Now you've lost me. If a text range is simply a pair of strings,
as I suggested, and collations are applied only during comparison
and RANGE_EMPTY(), why would the collation have to be baked into
the type?

If you're referring to the case (1) Create table with text-range column and collation C1 (2) Add check constraint
containingRANGE_EMPTY() (3) Add data (4) Alter column to have collation C2, possibly changing     the result of
RANGE_EMPTY()for existing ranges.
 
then that points to a problem with ALTER COLUMN.

best regards,
Florian Pflug



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Florian Pflug
Date:
Subject: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Next
From: Sushant Sinha
Date:
Subject: pg_trgm: unicode string not working