Re: IPv4 addresses, unsigned integers, space

Florian Weimer <fw(at)deneb(dot)enyo(dot)de> writes:
> If I switched from signed integers to unsigned integers (and from INET
> to "real" IPv4 addresses, consisting of the relevant 32 bits only) I
> think I could save about 25% of my table size.

> Does PostgreSQL already implement these data types? I don't think so.
> If I succeed in implementing them, would you accept a patch?

I doubt you will find any enthusiasm for a dumbed-down INET type,
considering that IPv6 capability will be increasingly necessary in
the future.

As for unsigned ints, I have no objection to 'em in principle, but
in practice we have more than enough problems already deducing the
appropriate type for a numeric constant. Unless you've got a super
new solution to that set of problems, adding unsigned ints to the
numeric hierarchy is going to be unmanageable.

regards, tom lane