Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199810192359.TAA24926@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind (Paul A Vixie <paul@vix.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> bigness of names doesn't matter. applications matter. i can see a use for > both types, but they are inherently different types. a host that has a > netmask which can be expressed in cidr notation is one such type. a net > that has a netmask which must be expressed in cidr notation is another such > type. the difference comes down to "host part must be zero" for the network > type. there are also some minor differences in the input/output formats, > since a host address always has four octets on both input and output, while > a network only prints as many octets as the cidr width specifies, and these > are the only required octets on input (though extra .0's can be specified). > > > I think we are just about there. If we go with my plan (completely > > different functionality for now and fold it later) there should be > > no API change later. There will be code and catalogue changes but > > they should be relatively painless. > > so shall i test the inet_cidr_ functions and punt them on in? Yep. Those are good points. Let's go. -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: