David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> It was also mentioned that using the Perl encoding function was
> non-performant; which is why caching the data into a memoization table has
> value.
I find it hard to believe that the standards folk would have chosen a
hostname encoding method that was so inefficient that memoization using
a database table would outperform just recomputing the encoding. What
I suspect the above really means is "man, this Perl code sucks".
regards, tom lane