Hi, I would just like to say that I would also like this to be implemented if the DB team determines it to be feasible. :)
-Cynthia On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 1:31 PM Edward Shryane via db-wg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Carsten, > > The DB team will create a proof of concept to see if this is feasible, and > I will report our findings to you and the DB-WG. > > Regards > Ed Shryane > RIPE NCC > > > > On 8 Jun 2021, at 12:03, Carsten Schiefner via db-wg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > maybe someone from the NCC would feel inclined to comment on the > > feasibility of the below? > > > > Thanks & best, > > > > -C. > > > > On 21.05.2021 12:55, Piotr Strzyzewski via db-wg wrote: > >> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:45:35PM +0200, Carsten Schiefner via db-wg > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Carsten, > >> > >>> after a quick chat with Dennis on this, he encouraged me to toss this > >>> into the seemingly stalled, but not yet dead debate: > >>> > >>> Right now, only the "inet[6]num:" attribute is the primary key to, of > or > >>> for inet[6]num objects. > >>> > >>> I wonder if it would be possible to make the tuple > >>> ("inet[6]num:","status:") the primary key instead: that should solve > the > >>> challenge to have an assignment that shall have the size of an > allocation. > >> > >> This is very good idea. > >> > >>> In case this has been exhaustedly discussed here already, please excuse > >>> my ignorance - I then obviously have failed to spot the respective > >>> contribution in the archives. > >> > >> I do not recall such discussion. > >> > >> Best, > >> Piotr > > > > >
