Pomarede Nicolas <npomarede@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> And it's true for IPv6 too, storing an IP that refer to an end point and
> not a subnet is requiring twice as much data as needed, because the
> netmask would always be ff:ff:ff:..:ff
> So, for people dealing with large database of IPs, it would be nice to be
> able to save 50% of the corresponding disk/cache/ram space for these IPs.
There seem to be a number of people in this thread laboring under the
illusion that we store a netmask as a mask. It's a bit count (think
/32 or /128) and occupies a whole one byte on disk. Killer overhead,
for sure.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
