Re: Why so few built-in range types?

Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In particular, I don't understand why there's not a
>> standard float8range type; that seems like a pretty common case.
>> I'd have also expected to see a standard textrange type.  What was
>> the rationale for leaving these out?

> A built-in textrange type would have to have collation "C", right? Do
> you think that would be useful to enough people?

No, its collation could be set to "default", which would match the
database's LC_COLLATE setting.  Probably the more interesting
implementation problem is to come up with a subtype_diff function ...

> One that I'd like to see is an IP address type, but that's complicated
> because inet and cidr support netmasks.

Yeah, it's not clear what if anything to do with the netmask.
        regards, tom lane