From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Partitioning by month causing an error?
In-reply-to: 
 <CAOC+FBWOs321LCj6Rxe8-==Q4So2XcNSf3eJ0KzTT3q2eHUnpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOC+FBW=zSLyHWg2XDTp2eeEAmwzkzZLQPBqFx7_Cso=WMK3ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <9226.1576897186@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAOC+FBWOs321LCj6Rxe8-==Q4So2XcNSf3eJ0KzTT3q2eHUnpA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com>
	message dated "Fri, 20 Dec 2019 20:03:47 -0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <19968.1576901751.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 23:15:51 -0500
Message-ID: <19969.1576901751@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Wells Oliver <wells.oliver@gmail.com> writes:
> This is really interesting to me: why? Running select '2019-04-30'::date
> between '2019-04-01'::date and '2019-04-30'::date; yields true, and
> generally the lower and upper bounds are inclusive in any kind of between
> check for languages I am familiar with.

It's possible to do it like that for discrete types like dates.  It's
not possible for continuous types.  Exercise: try to write a partitioning
rule for a "numeric" column that classifies every value into one and only
one partition, if the partitioning behavior is like A <= X <= B.

(No fair restricting the precision of the numeric.)

			regards, tom lane