Re: RFC: Temporal Extensions for PostgreSQL

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> My suggestion would be to focus on a period data type first and
>> foremost, as that's something that could be readily used by a lot of
>> folks. Of particular note, it's difficult to query tables that have
>> start_time and end_time fields to define a period; it's easy to screw up
>> the boundary conditions, and it's also hard to make those queries
>> perform well without going to extra lengths (such as defining a 'bogus'
>> GiST index on something like box(point(start,start),point(end,end)). And
>> it's not possible to do that in a way that avoids floating points and
>> their errors.
>
> FWIW there's already a type called tinterval that stores (start,end). I
> don't think it's very much documented; maybe it can be extended or used
> as base for a new, more complete and robust type, indexable in a more
> natural way, etc etc.

RI-Tree (Relational intervar tree)
http://www.dbs.informatik.uni-muenchen.de/Forschung/CAD/presentations/RI-Tree.pdf
looks promising for that purposes.

Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru)
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83