Re: [HACKERS] Definitional issue for INET types

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Definitional issue for INET types
Дата
Msg-id 15629.950802098@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Definitional issue for INET types  (Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <e99re41@DoCS.UU.SE> writes:
> 3) You can't compare inet and cidr because they're two different (albeit
> similar) things. If you want to compare them you have to explicitly cast
> inet to cidr or vice versa according to 1) or 2).

This might in fact be the right answer --- maybe CIDR and INET should
have different comparison semantics.  Right now the two types seem to
share exactly the same operators, which makes me wonder why we have
both.

I don't suppose Paul Vixie is still reading this list.  Someone should
contact him and ask where we went wrong.  Who was our point man on the
network types to begin with?
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Thomas Lockhart
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Almost there on column aliases
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Definitional issue for INET types