On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 05:52:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Jeff Davis <pg...@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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
