Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> writes:
> I believe that syntax is possible by specifying the index access method,
> e.g.:
> CONSTRAINT <name> EXCLUSION (a =, b &&) USING gist;
> versus:
> CONSTRAINT <name> EXCLUSION (a =, b &&) INDEX <indexname>;
> And the former could build the index implicitly. I haven't written the
> code yet, but I don't see any major problems.
> So, should I eliminate the latter syntax and only support the former, or
> should I support both?
I'd vote for only supporting the former.
What worries me more about that syntax is the postfix-operator ambiguity
--- I think it'll be hard to expand it to expressions. It might be
better to put the operator at the front; or maybe you need an extra
keyword in there.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
