Re: Problem with CIDR data type restrictions

Added to TODO:

* Prevent inet cast to cidr if the unmasked bits are not zero, or
zero bits

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >
> >
> >>Not sure how serious this is since we have gotten few complaints about
> >>it but clearly it should be fixed.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Personally I'm inclined to leave it for 8.1. The inet/cidr code is
> >really designed around the assumption that these datatypes are
> >interchangeable, and I suspect that enforcing a stronger distinction
> >will actually take much more wide-ranging changes than just this.
> >Do all of the functions on inet/cidr take care to deliver a value that
> >is both correctly marked and declared as the correct type? I doubt it.
> >It needs some thought not just a band-aid ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yeah.
>
> I am not sure I understand the intention, but I should have thought
> there was a good case for clearing the bits past the mask on conversion
> from either text or inet, rather than rejecting or invalidly copying.
>
> As you say, it needs some thought.
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073