On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 15:14 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > > Well, there is a certain amount of localized clarity, I will agree with > > that. The complexity comes when you accidentally rely on some > > transformation which seems logically sound, but could result in a > > transient empty range, which then throws an error. > > But by this argument you also need to support discontiguous ranges, don't you? > > I mean, if you want to insist that A intersect B has to still be a > legal range, what about A union B? >
I responded to a similar question/point here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-02/msg01073.php Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
