Re: PG_VERSION_NUM formatted incorrectly
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PG_VERSION_NUM formatted incorrectly |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20180122190455.7zpoxjuesi4qk7jt@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | PG_VERSION_NUM formatted incorrectly (Kieran McCusker <kieran.mccusker@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PG_VERSION_NUM formatted incorrectly
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Kieran McCusker wrote: > Hi > > I was looking at an issue with ogr_fdw where it is trying to get > the PG_VERSION_NUM when I noticed that in Postgresql 10.1 this is declared > as: > > #define PG_VERSION_NUM 100001 > > But shouldn't it be > > #define PG_VERSION_NUM 100100 > > or am I being dense, in which case sorry to have bothered you. You're not being dense -- the way we're using it is indeed a bit odd. But it was a concious decision to leave it like this: the reason is that we've been using these two digits to indicate patch level rather than major for so long, that is seems less likely to break version parsing tools if we continue to do that. So the patch level for release 10 is going to use the last two digits only, with the two middle digits remaining constant 00 forever. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: