Re: macaddr 64 bit (EUI-64) datatype support

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 08:33:00AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> As others have noted, there is no likelihood that we'd take a disk-format-
> compatibility-breaking patch for v10. Even if we wanted to do that, the
> above proposal would also break send/recv (binary COPY) compatibility for
> macaddr.
>
> I think that probably the best bet here is to have two types and put some
> thought into making them interoperate where appropriate, as the various
> sizes of int do. It's kind of a shame that this won't look like the
> approach used for inet addresses, but we're stuck.

If feels like we are going into VARCHAR2 territory where we end up
telling people to use an oddly-named data type forever. Some are
suggesting JSONB is in that category.

I wish I had a suggestion, but I am not above adding trickery to
pg_upgrade to improve the outcome.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +