* Dimitri Fontaine (dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr) wrote: > That means that this is, IMHO, the right approach. Have core support > that enables user defined RANGE types with indexing and planner support, > etc, like we have OPERATOR CLASS and FAMILY and all the jazz.
Yes, we do, however..
> And the useful stuff you need to have to benefit from that core support
> would be an extension. It could be a core maintained extension, and it
> could even get installed by default, so that all the users would need to
> do is 'CREATE EXTENSION timeranges;', for example.
I don't like the idea of having a capability which is not utilized
in core. We should make it so extensions can *also* have access to
define their own, but we should have the basics covered in core.
> a. core extensions, shipped by default
Having it as a core extension might work, but I'm not really 'sold' on
it.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
