Prev: [HACKERS] current value support
Next: [HACKERS] Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?
From: Bruce Momjian on 2 Jun 2010 21:34
David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 04:04:16PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
> > > index 9881ff4..9313112 100644
> > > --- a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
> > > +++ b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
> > > @@ -7134,7 +7134,7 @@ CREATE TYPE rainbow AS ENUM ('red', 'orange', 'yellow', 'green', 'blue', 'purple
> > > </row>
> > > <row>
> > > <entry> <literal>&amp;&amp;</literal> </entry>
> > > - <entry>Overlaps?</entry>
> > > + <entry>Overlaps? One point in common makes this true.</entry>
> > > <entry><literal>box '((0,0),(1,1))' &amp;&amp; box '((0,0),(2,2))'</literal></entry>
> > > </row>
> > > <row>
> >
> > Hmm, how does this look in horizontal space? (The <row> makes me think
> > it's a table.)
>
> Looks OK to me. The entry above, "Closest point to first operand on
> second operand" is actually wider.

Patch applied.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ None of us is going to be here forever. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Bruce Momjian on 2 Jun 2010 21:45
Greg Stark wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(a)2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >
> > * Circles, Boxes and other geometric datatypes defined "overlaps" to
> > include touching shapes. So
> >
> > * inet datatypes don't have a commutative operator on which a unique
> > index can be built. There is no "overlaps" equivalent, which again is a
> > shame because that stops them being used with the new feature.
>
> I think our unusual data types are one of the strong points of
> Postgres but they're missing a lot of operators and opclasses to make
> them really useful.
>
> There's no reason we couldn't have separate overlaps and
> overlaps-internally operators just like we have <=,>= and <,>. And it
> would be nice to flesh out the network data type more fully, perhaps
> merging in as much of ip4r as makes sense.

Added to TODO:

Add overlaps geometric operators that ignore point overlaps

* http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-03/msg00861.php

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ None of us is going to be here forever. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Bruce Momjian on 2 Jun 2010 21:47
Robert Haas wrote:
> > * inet datatypes don't have a commutative operator on which a unique
> > index can be built. There is no "overlaps" equivalent, which again is a
> > shame because that stops them being used with the new feature.
>
> This would be a nice thing to fix, and I was thinking about doing it,
> but I just ran out of time. I think it can be left for 9.1. I have
> not infrequently wanted to build an IP allocation database, and this
> would be perfect for that.

Added to TODO:

Add INET overlaps operator, for use by exclusion constraints

* http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-03/msg00845.php

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ None of us is going to be here forever. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: [HACKERS] current value support
Next: [HACKERS] Did we really want to force an initdb in beta2?