X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD57E5343F for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:34:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 69596-06 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:34:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from relay.oganer.net (relay.oganer.net [217.150.206.19]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B73055343D for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:34:09 -0300 (ADT) Received: from forest.bear.oganer.net (forest.bear.oganer.net [192.168.114.31] (may be forged)) by relay.oganer.net (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j3CCY38A000860 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:34:06 +0800 (KRAST) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:34:04 +0800 From: "Ilya A. Kovalenko" Reply-To: "Ilya A. Kovalenko" Organization: JSC Oganer-Service X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <14038968283.20050412203404@oganer.net> To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: operating "inet" type MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.185 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=PRIORITY_NO_NAME X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200504/176 X-Sequence-Number: 21069 Greetings, I'm confused, that PostgreSQL seems to don't have operators/functions for examining/modifying "inet" data type. No any octet/word-based means (like extract/replace), no even, trivial integer increments. No conversions, except conversion to symbolic string (parsing it is a mess and overhead). No even binary string conversions. You can do integer compare two "inet" values, but you can't do integer increment (i.e. increment inet value by integer). I understand, that developers has more important things to do, but they left "inet" type w/o any ways to work w/ it. Parsing "inet" converted text can't be, seriously, taken as alternative, but using numeric types to store addresses (and ignore native "inet" type) really, can. I'm using PostgreSQL 7.4.3, Can 8.0.1 do more ? Thank you. Ilya A. Kovalenko (mailto:shadow@oganer.net) SpecialEQ SW section JSC Oganer-Service