| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Data types for IP address. |
| Date: | 2011-02-23 21:33:11 |
| Message-ID: | 7245.1298496791@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> writes:
> On 02/23/11 4:44 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> *3. Start-End IP format :* 1.2.3.0-1.2.3.255
>> You don't even need to program the conversion, it is already done:
>>
>> % netmask 1.2.3.0:1.2.3.255
>> 1.2.3.0/24
> yes, but what about 10.1.2.57-10.1.2.123 ? presumably valid in his
> range system, and certainly NOT a valid CIDR range.
The question is does he actually have a use-case for address ranges that
don't correspond to legal CIDR ranges, but do nonetheless have an
identifiable lower boundary, upper boundary, and no holes? And if so,
what is it? The whole thing looked to me like somebody inventing
requirements with little or no study of what they really needed.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2011-02-23 22:01:09 | Re: Data types for IP address. |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-02-23 20:45:20 | Re: How to extract a value from a record using attnum or attname? |