Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F8F2E3CE0 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:32:30 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 97510-05 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:32:27 -0400 (AST) Received: from vms173003pub.verizon.net (vms173003pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.3]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3962E393A for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:32:27 -0400 (AST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([71.178.47.70]) by vms173003.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JUI004IB12RUZ43@vms173003.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:30:28 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CE71F832 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:32:07 -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 r4kz421DTLS9 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:32:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6A7D01F81D; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:32:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:32:05 -0500 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Best way to index IP data? In-reply-to: <20080111151935.40c8d2fd.darcy@druid.net> To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20080111213204.GV5294@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> <20080111162747.GT5294@mathom.us> <24044.1200082058@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20080111151935.40c8d2fd.darcy@druid.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200801/77 X-Sequence-Number: 28316 On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 03:19:35PM -0500, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: >Besides, there are many cases where you want to track both ipv4 and >ipv6 for the same purpose and requiring two different fields would be >less than ideal. And, there are many cases where you don't. I've got two kinds of db's that have IPs in them. In some, the IP is a small part of a table which is focused on something else. For those I use inet, which provides a nice bit of future-proofing. In other db's the IPs are the primary focus. There are lots and lots of IPs, and the space used by IPs may be the largest chunk of a particular table. For those tables, I don't use inet because the overhead really is a significant fraction of the space. Mike Stone