Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- To: Zoltan Boszormenyi <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>
- Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 18:00:20 -0400
- Message-id: <21939.1180562420@sss.pgh.pa.us> <text/plain>
Zoltan Boszormenyi <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes: > we at Cybertec have developed cast functions in C between > inet/cidr <-> bytea for a client and we would like to submit it. Why is this a good idea? Exposing the internal representation of a datatype is usually bad. What will you do when we add support for scoped IPv6 addressing, to take one obvious example? regards, tom lane
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- From: Zoltan Boszormenyi
- Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- References:
- New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- From: Zoltan Boszormenyi
- New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- Prev by Date: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make large sequential scans and VACUUMs work in a limited-size
- Next by Date: Query plan degradation 8.2 --> 8.3
- Previous by thread: Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- Next by thread: Re: New cast between inet/cidr and bytea
- Indexes: