Re: Why so few built-in range types? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Why so few built-in range types?
Date
Msg-id 3983.1322796086@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why so few built-in range types?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Why so few built-in range types?  (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>> I don't have any particular care about if cidr has indexing support or
>> not.  I'm certainly not *against* it, except insofar as it encourages
>> use of a data type that really could probably be better (by being more
>> like ip4r..).

> Not that you're biased or anything!  :-p

IIRC, a lot of the basic behavior of the inet/cidr types was designed by
Paul Vixie (though he's not to blame for their I/O presentation).
So I'm inclined to doubt that they're as broken as Stephen claims.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Inlining comparators as a performance optimisation
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Inlining comparators as a performance optimisation