Re: SQL:2011 application time

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL:2011 application time
Date: 2024-09-05 12:09:49
Message-ID: 54390149-11d6-4f52-bbe8-f69832ceb3bd@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 07.08.24 22:54, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> Here are some fixes based on outstanding feedback (some old some new).

I have studied your patches v39-0001 through v39-0004, which correspond
to what had been reverted plus the new empty range check plus various
minor fixes. This looks good to me now, so I propose to go ahead with that.

Btw., in your 0003 you point out that this prevents using the WITHOUT
OVERLAPS functionality for non-range types. But I think this could be
accomplished by adding an "is empty" callback as a support function or
something like that. I'm not suggesting to do that here, but it might
be worth leaving a comment about that possibility.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2024-09-05 12:14:48 Re: Jargon and acronyms on this mailing list
Previous Message Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) 2024-09-05 11:36:38 Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication