Re: WIP: generalized index constraints

On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 14:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> What about them?  It's not clear why you think this requires anything
> special.

>From a syntax standpoint, I need to represent one operator for every
index column involved in the constraint. So, if there's a functional
index on ((a||b)::circle), I clearly can't have an exclusion constraint
like (a =, b =).

I see two options:
1. (<expr> <op>), where <expr> is an expression over table attributes    that must have the exact signature as the
expressionfor the index.2. (<index_col> <op>), and then read the expression from the index
 

and in either case, use that expression for the extra checking that I
need to do: I need to check whether the input heap tuple conflicts with
concurrently inserting heap tuples, and I also need to do a recheck
step.

#1 seems like extra work and complexity, because I need to test for the
correct signature (maybe that's not difficult), and that extra
flexibility is pretty marginal -- I can't think of an obvious case where
you'd want different expressions. Also, it complicates the simple case
of wanting the expressions to match.

#2 is awkward because the expression columns of an index have generated
names, and you would have to write things like (pg_expression_1 &&).
Also, it makes the constraint too tied to the index, which is a valid
complaint Peter had.

Perhaps you can point me in the right direction to see if two
expressions/functions have matching signatures? Or, if that is too much
of a pain, perhaps I should just test for equal expressions?

Regards,Jeff Davis