On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Any suggestions for the name to be used for the new datatype the can
> > work for both 48 and 64 bit MAC addresses?
> The precedent of int4/int8/float4/float8 is that SQL data types should
> be named after their length in bytes.  So I'd be inclined to call this
> "macaddr8" not "macaddr64".  That would suggest taking the simple
> approach of always storing values in the 8-byte format, rather than
> dealing with the complexities of having two formats internally, two
> display formats, etc.

Be that as it may, but almost everybody else (outside the db world?) uses
bits.  The C types, for example, are expressed in bits (int8_t, int64_t,

> While comparing a 48 bit MAC address with 64 bit MAC address, Ignore
> > the two bytes if the contents in those bytes are reserved bytes.
> Um ... I don't follow.  Surely these must compare different:
> 01-01-01-FF-FE-01-01-01
> 01-01-01-FF-0E-01-01-01

What's more, it now requires 2 comparisons and some logic versus the
possibility of a single memcmp.


Reply via email to