On Jun30, 2011, at 09:05 , Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tor, 2011-06-30 at 08:45 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote: >> I don't think it will - as it stands, there isn't a single collatable >> type RANGE but instead one *distinct* type per combination of base >> type, btree opclass and collation. The reasons for that were discussed >> at length - the basic argument for doing it that way was to make a >> range represent a fixed set of values. > > How would the system catalogs be initialized under that theory: surely > you're not going to seed (nr. of types) * (nr. of collations) * (nr. of > opclasses) range types in initdb?
There's CREATE RANGE. By default, no range types would exists I believe. best regards, Florian Pflug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
