Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwab5=9nkUnzWubFYssowKDoo9eFG05LhVLq_kZ7kj4cyQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query
Re: [HACKERS] Range Partitioning behaviour - query |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/02/24 8:38, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Upper bound of a range partition is an exclusive bound. A note was added
>> recently to the CREATE TABLE page to make this clear.
>>
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/sql- createtable.html
>
>
> Thanks. Actually, my confusion was that the upper bound value would be
> included when "TO" clause is used in the syntax.
Hmm, TO sounds like it implies inclusive.
I think most common usage of the word ends up being inclusive but the word itself doesn't really care.
Dictionary.com has a good example:
"We work from nine to five." - you leave at the beginning of the 5 o'clock hour (I'm going for casual usage here)
Since our implementation of ranges is half-open the usage here is consistent with that concept. That it doesn't match BETWEEN is actually somewhat nice since you can use ranges for half-open and BETWEEN if you want to be concise with fully-closed endpoints. But it is one more thing to remember.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: