Greg Stark wrote: > a.b.c > > When a three-part address is specified, the last part shall be interpreted > as a 16-bit quantity and placed in the rightmost two bytes of the network > address. This makes the three-part address format convenient for specifying > Class B network addresses as "128.net.host" .
I can understand the a.b case, but the a.b.c case is just weird. What logic is there that it is a.0.b.c? Nothing I can think of except convention. I agree with Vixie that this syntax is strange and shouldn't be encouraged. > > Tom has challenged you to prove that this is caused by Pg code and not > > code in your native libraries. Until then, the matter should rest. > > Indeed, while I'm not sure what platform the original submitter's using in the > case of glibc it's already a reported bug (by me no less): > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=183814 BSD/OS 4.3.1 doesn't like 127.1: $ ping 127.1 ping: 127.1: hostname nor servname provided, or not known $ ping 127.0.0.1 PING 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.11 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.056 ms -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
