Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A922E38B3 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:28:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 31006-04 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:28:25 -0400 (AST) Received: from vms048pub.verizon.net (vms048pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.48]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E92B2E38AD for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:28:25 -0400 (AST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([71.178.47.70]) by vms048.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JUH00LMTN2GLOL3@vms048.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:27:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id B52241F812; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:27:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (osgiliath.home.mathom.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id UiXKlfZYMnA4; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:27:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A8E351F80E; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:27:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:27:49 -0500 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Best way to index IP data? In-reply-to: <13179.1200064791@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: Tom Lane Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: Tom Lane , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20080111162747.GT5294@mathom.us> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mathom.us X-Pgp-Fingerprint: 53 FF 38 00 E7 DD 0A 9C 84 52 84 C5 EE DF 7C 88 References: <200801101614.54729.kevin@kevinkempterllc.com> <36e682920801101541o7626bbddj428617144240c554@mail.gmail.com> <13179.1200064791@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200801/71 X-Sequence-Number: 28310 On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 10:19:51AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >Given that the world is going to IPv6 in a few years whether you like it >or not, that seems pretty darn short-sighted to me. Well, a native IPv6 type would also be nice; inet is ridiculously bloated for both IPv4 *and* IPv6. Mike Stone