Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C59D2E346B for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:36:35 -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 45200-04 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:36:32 -0400 (AST) Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net (vms173001pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.1]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327D32E2FBE for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:36:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from osgiliath.mathom.us ([71.178.47.70]) by vms173001.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JUI00HMH99U7Q55@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:27:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6ED11F81D; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:36:04 -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 FL536JXh3+vz; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:36:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by osgiliath.mathom.us (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AD7D61F80E; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:36:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:36:02 -0500 From: Michael Stone Subject: Re: Best way to index IP data? In-reply-to: <28651.1200097150@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: Tom Lane Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Mail-followup-to: Tom Lane , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <20080112003600.GA5294@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> <20080111212703.GU5294@mathom.us> <28651.1200097150@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200801/91 X-Sequence-Number: 28330 On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 07:19:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >It was correct, but not as of 8.3. Considering you could save a whole >one byte by not storing the netmask Hmm. One for the netmask, plus the other two mystery bytes. :-) A byte here and a byte there is fine. 20% of a few billion IPs does start to add up. Mike Stone