| From: | darcy(at)druid(dot)net (D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain) |
|---|---|
| To: | winter(at)jurai(dot)net (Matthew N(dot) Dodd) |
| Cc: | paul(at)vix(dot)com (Paul A Vixie), pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind |
| Date: | 1998-10-20 17:43:30 |
| Message-ID: | m0zVfog-0000emC@druid.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thus spake Matthew N. Dodd
> I'm voting that the rest of the peanut gallary sit down and allow
> PostgreSQL to adopt Vixie's world vision of the INET type. If after the
> release it is found to be lacking it can be addressed then.
Actually, we already have. The discussion is only over adding a second
type and what, exactly, it should be.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul A Vixie | 1998-10-20 17:43:56 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-20 17:26:59 | Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ? |