From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "R, Rajesh (STSD)" <rajesh(dot)r2(at)hp(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] ipv6 support for getaddrinfo.c |
Date: | 2006-02-21 14:55:12 |
Message-ID: | 15326.1140533712@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"R, Rajesh (STSD)" <rajesh(dot)r2(at)hp(dot)com> writes:
> Patch for getaddrinfo.c to recognize ipv6 addresses.
Is this really interesting? Are there machines out there that have
usable support for IPv6 and yet haven't got getaddrinfo?
We've deliberately avoided trying to support ipv6 in our src/port/
substitute routines, on the grounds that this scenario wasn't important
in the real world. I'd just as soon not add this unless really
necessary.
The patch as written is quite unusable anyway, as (a) it's not -c
format, (b) it appears not to be against any version close to CVS HEAD,
(c) it breaks the code entirely on machines without struct sockaddr_in6
or inet_pton (which begs the question even more about scope of
applicability).
Also please note that proposed patches go to pgsql-patches --- they are
certainly far off-topic for pgsql-general.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-02-21 15:09:45 | Re: win cmd line query tool |
Previous Message | uuZZuuZZ (sent by Nabble.com) | 2006-02-21 14:54:57 | Re: win cmd line query tool |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-02-21 15:15:36 | Re: pg_config, pg_service.conf, postgresql.conf .... |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2006-02-21 14:43:47 | Re: SPI: Correct way to rollback a subtransaction? |