Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
От | Alex Pilosov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSO.4.10.10010271833010.22890-100000@spider.pilosoft.com 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 |
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > 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). I absolutely agree, except for network(), which should return cidr. (after all, this is the network). As I mentioned in another email, should inet datatype really care whether host part is all-ones or all-zeros and reject that? It would make sense to me (10.0.0.0/8::inet is not a valid address, but 10.0.0.0/8::cidr is), but it would break some people's scripts... I'm talking here from a perspective of a network provider with P knowledge...I'm sure Marc can chime in here... -alex
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: