Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types

From: darcy(at)druid(dot)net (D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain)
To: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org (The Hermit Hacker)
Cc: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian), pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
Date: 1998-11-02 13:43:47
Message-ID: m0zaKGp-0000eRC@druid.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thus spake The Hermit Hacker
> > Huh. You have a backend crash fix, and we can't apply it until after
> > 6.4 is out the door?
>
> D'Arcy is going to release a patch for the fix on the same day as
> the release, as it is something that only affects a very small aspect of
> the server, and will affect very few ppl...

Not so sure about that, Marc. It is, however, easy to work around. You
just have to set NOT NULL for any inet or cidr type but I already have
a use for null ip numbers. That's how I found the problem.

Of course, it's such a new type that I'm sure it won't be heavily used for
a little while anyway.

I just had another thought. Do any other types exhibit this problem?
I think I'll go check enhance a few regression tests.

--
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.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 1998-11-02 15:00:41 Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
Previous Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 1998-11-02 13:40:12 Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types