On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 6:25 PM, Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com> wrote:
>> http://pgfoundry.org/projects/ip4r/
>>
>> That has the advantage over using integers, or the built-in inet type,
>> of being indexable for range and overlap queries.
>
> Agreed. ip4r is da bomb.
Hello to all,
I also have to store a lot of IP v4 addresses, and I think the internal
inet type is somewhat overkill for that, since it always require 8 bytes,
even if you don't need to store a netmask.
When storing millions of IP add, this means MB of space used for nothing
in that case.
As ip4r seems to work very well with postgresql, is there a possibility to
see it merged in postgresql, to have a native 4 bytes IPv4 address date
type ?
Nicolas