Re: operator exclusion constraints

On Nov 6, 2009, at 10:42 AM, Jeff Davis wrote:

> Right now, I am leaning toward Form 2, and EXCLUSION/BY. So the  
> typical
> case would read like:
>
>  EXCLUSION USING gist (room, during) BY (=, &&)

I like this, but like EXCLUDE better
    EXCLUDE USING gist (room, during) BY (=, &&)

Is your objection to EXCLUDE for cases when there is no USING clause?
    EXLUDE (room, during) BY (=, &&)

Yes, I can see how that'd be a bit more confusing. So EXCLUSION  
probably is best.

BTW, is it the case that room maps to = and during maps to && in this  
example? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to combine them?
    EXCLUSION (room WITH =, during WITH &&)

Or am I misunderstanding how this works (quite likely, I'm sure).

Best,

David