Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.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