David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:31:05AM -0800, Scott Bailey wrote: >> As for the extra bits, would it be better to just require continuous >> ranges to be either [] or [)? But I don't know which would be >> preferred. My inclination would be toward [), but Tom seemed to >> indicate that perhaps [] was the norm.
> [] makes certain operations--namely the important ones in > calendaring--impossible, or at least incredibly kludgy, to do. I > think we ought to leave openness at each end up to the user, > independent of the underlying implementation details. Yes. A range implementation that couldn't support all four cases of [], [), (], () would be seriously crippled IMO. 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