Jim Crate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > on 7/15/03, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>If I switched from signed integers to unsigned integers (and from INET >>to "real" IPv4 addresses, consisting of the relevant 32 bits only) I >>think I could save about 25% of my table size. > > Why do you need unsigned ints to hold IP addresses?
This is a misunderstanding. I could use both space-conservative IP addresses and unsigned integers. > What difference does it make if IP addresses with a class A higher > than 127 appear as negative numbers? The mapping does not preserve ordering if not done carefully. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
