Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3218.972684235@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR (Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: