Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0011050340090.775-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > 3. The function host(inet) will return a text representation of > just the IP part of an INET or CIDR value, eg, "127.1.0.0". > All four octets will always appear, the netmask will never appear. > (This is the same as its current behavior, I think.) I think there was definite merit in the host() function returning inet, as you originally proposed (if only for consistency with the proposed changes to network() and broadcast()). A separate function for formatting output seems necessary, but if we don't reach an agreement though, it ought to work to cast CIDR to INET to get all four octets, no? > 4. A new function text(inet) will return a text representation of > both the IP and netmask parts of an INET or CIDR value, eg, > "127.1.0.0/16". Unlike the default display conversions, all four > octets and the netmask length will always appear in the result. > Note that the system will consider this function to be a typecast, > so the same result can be gotten with inetval::text or > CAST(inetval AS text). I think the typecast-to-text representation of CIDR should be visually the same as the normal representation. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: