Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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: karavelov(at)mail(dot)bg, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why so few built-in range types?
Date: 2011-12-02 02:16:58
Message-ID: CA+Tgmob4xcZ_Hp9tF9YoPLxfPR2CnfqBdGy2etCL0K40GUJOuA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> I don't have any particular care about if cidr has indexing support or
> not.  I'm certainly not *against* it, except insofar as it encourages
> use of a data type that really could probably be better (by being more
> like ip4r..).

Not that you're biased or anything!  :-p

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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-12-02 02:46:09
Subject: Re: Inlining comparators as a performance optimisation
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-12-02 02:15:14
Subject: Re: Inlining comparators as a performance optimisation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group