Re: operator exclusion constraints

2009/11/3 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
>> I'm not excited about using NOT, because I think it has a hint of a
>> double-negative when combined with EXCLUSION.
>
> Well, the choice of EXCLUSION isn't set in stone either ...
>

Is this really a generalized uniqueness constraint, extended to
support operators other than = ?
Perhaps sticking with the word UNIQUE might be more suggestive of this:
 UNIQUE (room_number WITH = , during WITH &&)

or:
 UNIQUE (room_number , during USING && )

- Dean