| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why so few built-in range types? |
| Date: | 2011-11-30 18:26:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYY-dy8LPp+Y_T2GxyuDh7k35BzqwD9jdo+jhaOi+R+Ow@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> One that I'd like to see is an IP address type, but that's complicated
> because inet and cidr support netmasks.
A CIDR address defines a range all by itself, without packing any
other type on top. It just needs GIST support, and an indexable
operator for "contains or is contained by"; then, you can define an
exclusion constraint over a CIDR column to enforce a
no-duplicate-or-overlapping-IP-ranges rule. I started working on that
at one point, but I didn't have as much enthusiasm as the task needed
so I gave up before accomplishing anything particularly useful.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-30 18:30:03 | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-11-30 18:21:54 | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |