| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, jian he <jian(dot)universality(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
| Date: | 2024-05-21 19:54:47 |
| Message-ID: | cc49f45fb3f3cfbac37515cdb19a8f0df8b7f097.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2024-05-21 at 13:57 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> What I think is less clear is what that means for temporal primary
> keys.
Right.
My message was specifically a response to the concern that there was
some kind of design flaw in the range types or exclusion constraints
mechanisms.
I don't believe that empty ranges represent a design flaw. If they
don't make sense for temporal constraints, then temporal constraints
should forbid them.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-05-21 19:54:52 | Re: zlib detection in Meson on Windows broken? |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2024-05-21 19:42:57 | Re: libpq compression (part 3) |