Re: SQL:2011 application time

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Vik Fearing
Тема Re: SQL:2011 application time
Дата
Msg-id 8a47be1e-4d12-4eb8-b3d6-90371a715ebc@postgresfriends.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SQL:2011 application time  (Paul Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 10/11/23 05:47, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
>> +SELECT pg_get_indexdef(conindid, 0, true) FROM pg_constraint WHERE 
>> conname = 'temporal_rng_pk';
>> +                                pg_get_indexdef
>> +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> + CREATE UNIQUE INDEX temporal_rng_pk ON temporal_rng USING gist (id, 
>> valid_at)
>>
>> Shouldn't this somehow show the operator classes for the columns?  We 
>> are using different operator classes for the id and valid_at columns, 
>> aren't we?
> 
> We only print the operator classes if they are not the default, so they 
> don't appear here.
> 
> I do suspect something more is desirable though. For exclusion 
> constraints we replace everything before the columns with just "EXCLUDE 
> USING gist". I could embed WITHOUT OVERLAPS but it's not valid syntax in 
> CREATE INDEX. Let me know if you have any ideas.

Why not?  The standard does not mention indexes (although some 
discussions last week might change that) so we can change the syntax for 
it as we wish.  Doing so would also allow us to use ALTER TABLE ... 
USING INDEX for such things.
-- 
Vik Fearing




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Some performance degradation in REL_16 vs REL_15
Следующее
От: Vik Fearing
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Tab completion for AT TIME ZONE