Re: Vector type (Re: challenging constraint situation -
От | Alban Hertroys |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Vector type (Re: challenging constraint situation - |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44770AEB.301@magproductions.nl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Vector type (Re: challenging constraint situation - how do I make it) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Vector type (Re: challenging constraint situation - how do I make it)
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote: > Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl> writes: >>With what I have in mind, both overlap and equality would violate the >>unique constraint. I don't quite see why someone'd want to forbid >>overlap but to allow equality; isn't not allowing equality the whole >>point of a unique constraint? > > You're missing the point. Letting "~" represent the operator that > tests for interval-overlap, we can have > A -------------- > B ------------------ I'd say "unique constraint violation" right here (provided there's a unique constraint on this column, of course). The order in which these are inserted/updated doesn't seem to matter either. I'm afraid I'm still missing the point... or maybe I'm not wrong??? > C ---------------- > so that A ~ B and B ~ C but not A ~ C. This is too much unlike normal > equality for a btree to work with "~" as the "equality" operator. -- Alban Hertroys alban@magproductions.nl magproductions b.v. T: ++31(0)534346874 F: ++31(0)534346876 M: I: www.magproductions.nl A: Postbus 416 7500 AK Enschede // Integrate Your World //
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: