Re: inet/cidr ipv6 operations

Chris Angelico <rosuav(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> It's hard to muster much excitement about that when we've already
>> got "numeric".

> True, but I wasn't able (with 9.1, so that might have changed since)
> to add inet to numeric. Maybe that would be easier?

There's no such function today, but it could be added if anyone cared
enough.

> I don't think inet + inet is the right thing for this.

Agreed, that doesn't seem very sensible --- it's a units failure,
in some sense.

regards, tom lane