Re: [BUGS] Possible bug: pg_hba.conf file

2004-11-08 Thread Gaetano Mendola
Tom Lane wrote: ! maskl = (0xUL << (32 - (int) bits)) ! & 0xUL; Is that "& 0xUL" required ? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze i

Re: [BUGS] Possible bug: pg_hba.conf file

2004-11-07 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > So I'm guessing there is something wrong with the way 0.0.0.0/0 is being > recognized? Hmm, I'm betting you are on a machine where shifting a 32-bit quantity left 32 bits doesn't reliably give zero. This misbehavior is actually allowed by the C standard :-( ... but it

[BUGS] Possible bug: pg_hba.conf file

2004-11-07 Thread kael
Hey guys, I'm a fairly new user to the postgresql world... so *perhaps* this is not a bug. But I cannot get the following entry to work in the pg_hba.conf file: hostall all 0.0.0.0/0 md5 <-- doesn't work hostall all 4.0.0.0/8 md5 <-- matches anything 4.x.x.x (wor