WIP: generalized index constraints
in [PgSql]
|
Prev: corrupted double-linked list
Next: Timestamp to time_t
From: David Fetter on 15 Sep 2009 15:49 On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:22:46PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:03 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > * "operator-based constraints" > > A little math-ier, but talks about the API rather than details of > > the server implementation. > > I like this much better. Maybe "index operator constraints" or "operator > index constraints"? The word, "index" goes to implementation details, which may change. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david(a)fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter(a)gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- 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: Jeff Davis on 15 Sep 2009 17:42 On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 12:49 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > I like this much better. Maybe "index operator constraints" or "operator > > index constraints"? > > The word, "index" goes to implementation details, which may change. Ok, let's vote on a name then: operator constraints operator exclusion constraints operator conflict constraints conflict operator constraints operator index constraints index constraints generalized index constraints something else? Right now, I like "conflict operator constraints" for the long name (e.g. feature title, long description in docs), and "operator constraints" for short (e.g. in the code and some places in the docs). Regards, Jeff Davis -- 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: Jeff Davis on 15 Sep 2009 17:46 On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > operator constraints > operator exclusion constraints > operator conflict constraints > conflict operator constraints > operator index constraints > index constraints > generalized index constraints > something else? Just to add a couple more permutations of Robert Haas's suggestions: exclusion operator constraints exclusive operator constraints I also like those. I think that using the word "operator" first makes it sound like the operator is the thing being excluded, and adding "-based" makes it more clear but it is too verbose. Regards, Jeff Davis -- 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: Tom Lane on 15 Sep 2009 17:52 Jeff Davis <pgsql(a)j-davis.com> writes: > On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: >> operator constraints >> operator exclusion constraints >> operator conflict constraints >> conflict operator constraints >> operator index constraints >> index constraints >> generalized index constraints >> something else? > Just to add a couple more permutations of Robert Haas's suggestions: > exclusion operator constraints > exclusive operator constraints To my ear, "operator exclusion constraints" or "exclusive operator constraints" seem reasonable; the other permutations of that phrase simply aren't good English. I'm not tremendously happy with any of them though... regards, tom lane -- 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: Joshua Tolley on 15 Sep 2009 19:02
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 05:52:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Jeff Davis <pgsql(a)j-davis.com> writes: > > On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:42 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > >> operator constraints > >> operator exclusion constraints > >> operator conflict constraints > >> conflict operator constraints > >> operator index constraints > >> index constraints > >> generalized index constraints > >> something else? > > > Just to add a couple more permutations of Robert Haas's suggestions: > > > exclusion operator constraints > > exclusive operator constraints > > To my ear, "operator exclusion constraints" or "exclusive operator > constraints" seem reasonable; the other permutations of that phrase > simply aren't good English. I was having a hard time coming up with a name that was adequately short-and-sweet, and still conveyed the idea of both "operator" and "index", which seems important so as to designate between these and the constraints we've had all along. Perhaps "indexed operator constraints"? -- Joshua Tolley / eggyknap End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com |