On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 18:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> Oh, maybe I'm confused. Are you saying you'd need multiple copies of >> the base type, or multiple range types based on a single base type? > > The latter. That is, if you want a timestamp range with granularity 1 > second, and a timestamp range with granularity 1 minute, I think those > need to have their own entries in pg_type.
OK, I agree with that. Sorry. > The way I look at it, typmod just doesn't help at all. It's useful > perhaps for constraining what a column can hold (like a different kind > of CHECK constraint), or perhaps for display purposes. But typmod isn't > really a part of the type system itself. I view that as a problem in need of fixing, but that's another discussion. > There may be some utility in a pseudo-type like "anyrange", but I think > that's a separate issue. Yeah, interesting idea. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
