Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
От | Larry Rosenman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20001027172406.A26910@lerami.lerctr.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> [001027 17:04]: > BTW, does it strike anyone else as peculiar that the host(), > broadcast(), network(), and netmask() functions yield results > of type text, rather than type inet? Seems like it'd be considerably > more useful if they returned values of type inet with masklen = 32 > (except for network(), which would keep the original masklen while > coercing bits to its right to 0). > > Given the current proposal that inet_out should always display all 4 > octets, and the existing fact that inet_out suppresses display of > a /32 netmask, the textual display of SELECT host(...) etc would > remain the same as it is now. But AFAICS you could do more with > an inet-type result value, like say compare it to other inet or cidr > values ... > > Comments? Why was it done this way, anyway? It doesn't bother me, as long as there is someway for me to get from a CIDR type to 4 octets output with no mask indicated, and print the broadcast and netmask and bits out separately from ONE column in the table. I.E. for select network('207.158.72.0/24'),broadcast('207.158.72.0/24'),netmask('207.158.72.0/24') I get 207.158.72.0 207.158.72.255 255.255.255.0 as output. Aside from that, I'm not picky. Larry > > regards, tom lane -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 (voice) Internet: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: