Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Except that what you want is to forbid overlap, not forbid equality.
>> This is not possible with btree-based unique indexes, because btree
>> will not like an opclass whose "equality" member is not transitive.
> With what I have in mind, both overlap and equality would violate the
> unique constraint. I don't quite see why someone'd want to forbid
> overlap but to allow equality; isn't not allowing equality the whole
> point of a unique constraint?
You're missing the point. Letting "~" represent the operator that
tests for interval-overlap, we can have
A --------------
B ------------------
C ----------------
so that A ~ B and B ~ C but not A ~ C. This is too much unlike normal
equality for a btree to work with "~" as the "equality" operator.
regards, tom lane