On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2011-01-08 at 15:47 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: >> > Any ideas? Maybe, with alignment and a "flags" byte (to hold >> > inclusivity, infinite boundaries, etc.), the extra 4 bytes doesn't cost >> > much, anyway? >> >> I'd be really reluctant to bloat the range representation by 4 bytes >> to support an anyrange type. Better to defer this until the great day >> when we get a better typmod system, at least IMHO. > > Can you elaborate? How can we have generic functions without ANYRANGE? > > And without generic functions, how do we make it easy for users to > specify a new range type?
Oh, hmm. What generic functions did you have in mind? -- 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
