Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: version() output vs. 32/64 bits

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Subject: Re: version() output vs. 32/64 bits
Date: 2008-12-31 15:54:07
Message-ID: 20081231155407.GC3809@alvh.no-ip.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On Wednesday 31 December 2008 04:45:01 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> PostgreSQL 8.4devel on i386-pc-bsdi4.3.1, compiled by GCC 2.95.3, 32-bit
> 
> > Maybe we should separate all that, e.g.,
> 
> > SELECT version();	=> 'PostgreSQL 8.4devel'
> > SELECT pg_host_os();	=> 'bsdi4.3.1'
> > SELECT pg_host_cpu();	=> 'i386' (although this is still faulty, as per my 
> > original argument; needs some thought)
> > SELECT pg_compiler();	=> 'GCC 2.95.3'
> > SELECT pg_pointer_size(); => 4 (or 32) (this could also be a SHOW variable)
> 
> Seems like serious overkill.  No one has asked for access to individual
> components of the version string, other than the PG version number
> itself, which we already dealt with.

Maybe we could have a separate function which returned the info in
various columns (OUT params).  Maybe it would be useful to normalize the
info as reported the buildfarm, which right now is a bit ad-hoc.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-12-31 16:01:25
Subject: Re: pg_pltemplate entries for external PLs
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-12-31 15:49:03
Subject: Re: version() output vs. 32/64 bits

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group