Re: Why so few built-in range types?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why so few built-in range types?
Date: 2011-11-30 22:56:42
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZChY_K=stGN0aeMngKhJnOjS4kbD7+0C_9LK=krco4ww@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Erm, isn't there a contrib type that already does all that for you..?
> ip4r or whatever?  Just saying, if you're looking for that capability..

Oh, huh, good to know. Still, I'm not sure why you need to load a
separate type to get this... there's no reason why the built-in CIDR
type couldn't support it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-11-30 23:57:51 Re: FlexLocks
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2011-11-30 20:58:29 Re: Why so few built-in range types?