| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] Bug in create operator and/or initdb |
| Date: | 2005-01-30 06:46:19 |
| Message-ID: | 29973.1107067579@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> writes:
> For a replacement type, how important is it that it be completely
> compatible with the existing inet/cidr types? Is anyone actually using
> inet types with a non-cidr mask?
If you check the archives you'll discover that our current inet/cidr
types were largely designed and implemented by Paul Vixie (yes, that
Vixie). I'm disinclined to second-guess Paul about the external
definition of these types; I just want to rationalize the internal
representation a bit. In particular we've got some issues about
conversions between the two types ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bradley D. Snobar | 2005-01-30 07:22:44 | Re: BUG #1434: ERROR: type "bigserial" does not exist |
| Previous Message | Steve Atkins | 2005-01-30 04:20:10 | Re: [BUGS] Bug in create operator and/or initdb |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-30 06:51:08 | Re: Huge memory consumption during vacuum (v.8.0) |
| Previous Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2005-01-30 06:14:06 | Huge memory consumption during vacuum (v.8.0) |