| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: inet regression test |
| Date: | 2003-01-15 20:22:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20476.1042662163@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> Index Scan using inet_idx1 on inet_tbl (cost=3D0.00..4.68 rows=3D7
> width=3D64)
> Index Cond: ((i > '192.168.1.0/24'::inet) AND (i <=3D
> '192.168.1.255'::inet))
> Filter: (i << '192.168.1.0/24'::inet)
> (3 rows)
That's the expected plan ...
> regression=3D# select * from inet_tbl where i<<'192.168.1.0/24'::cidr;
> c | i =20
> ----------------+------------------
> 192.168.1.0/24 | 192.168.1.0/25
> 192.168.1.0/24 | 192.168.1.255/25
> 192.168.1.0/24 | 192.168.1.226
> (3 rows)
... and that's the expected result. So why'd you get a different result
while running the regression test? Curiouser and curiouser...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-01-15 20:27:17 | Re: inet regression test |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-01-15 20:19:25 | Re: inet regression test |