Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space
Дата
Msg-id
22631.1058281656@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space (Florian Weimer)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Jim Crate <jcrate@deepskytech.com>
Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Florian Weimer writes: > If I switched from signed integers to unsigned integers (and from INET > to "real" IPv4 addresses, consisting of the relevant 32 bits only) I > think I could save about 25% of my table size. > Does PostgreSQL already implement these data types? I don't think so. > If I succeed in implementing them, would you accept a patch? I doubt you will find any enthusiasm for a dumbed-down INET type, considering that IPv6 capability will be increasingly necessary in the future. As for unsigned ints, I have no objection to 'em in principle, but in practice we have more than enough problems already deducing the appropriate type for a numeric constant. Unless you've got a super new solution to that set of problems, adding unsigned ints to the numeric hierarchy is going to be unmanageable. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления