From: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Date: | 2000-10-28 03:08:58 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.10.10010272255510.2291-100000@spider.pilosoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> A more interesting question is whether the system needs to provide any
> assisting functions that aren't there now. The lookup function you guys
> are postulating seems like it would be (in the simple cases)
> create function my_network(inet) returns cidr as
> 'select network from my_networks where ???'
as in my mail:
select network from my_network where network>>$1 order by
network_prefix(network) desc limit 1;
(i.e. if many networks cover the ip address, pick the one with longest
prefix). The only hard question here, how to properly index this table.
This sounds like a perfect application of user-defined index method.
I need to look up documentation on how they work...
However, this probably won't pose a major problem in production: the
networks table will be relatively small.
> Maybe it's too late at night, but I'm having a hard time visualizing
> what the ??? condition is and whether any additional system-level
> functions are needed to make it simple/efficient.
Actually, you can scratch my proposal. I realise it could be inconvenient
for some people.
I'll be probably putting all my hosts as inet::xxx/32, have the above
lookup function to get real network, and do operations on that.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex Pilosov | 2000-10-28 03:27:38 | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |
Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2000-10-28 03:06:12 | Re: Summary: what to do about INET/CIDR |