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.4.10.10010272338150.2291-100000@spider.pilosoft.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
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). Yep, absolutely. > 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?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: