Re: Best way to index IP data?

From: Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Best way to index IP data?
Date: 2008-01-11 21:27:05
Message-ID: 20080111212703.GU5294@mathom.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 03:07:38PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Michael Stone <mstone+postgres(at)mathom(dot)us> writes:
>> Well, a native IPv6 type would also be nice; inet is ridiculously
>> bloated for both IPv4 *and* IPv6.
>
>Nonsense. 3 bytes overhead on a 16-byte address is not "ridiculously
>bloated", especially if you want a netmask with it.

Big if, no? There's a very large set of users that *don't* want/need a
netmask, which is why the topic keeps coming back. (Also, according to
the docs, inet requires 24 bytes, which is 50% more than needed; is that
not correct?)

Mike Stone

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Stone 2008-01-11 21:32:05 Re: Best way to index IP data?
Previous Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 2008-01-11 20:19:35 Re: Best way to index IP data?