On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 12:18 -0600, Eric McKeeth wrote:
> This is ugly, but it does seem to enforce the constraint I need, of
> non-overlapping dates where sharing an endpoint is not considered an
> overlap.
The period type supports different inclusivity/exclusivity combinations.
So, the period:
'[2009-01-02, 2009-01-03)'
Does not overlap with:
'[2009-01-03, 2009-01-04)'
Because "[" or "]" means "inclusive" and "(" or ")" means "exclusive".
For further discussion, you can join the temporal-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailing list (sign up at
http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/temporal-general ). If this still
does not solve your use case, I'd like to see if it can be modified to
do so.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
