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

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

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>,Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,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 19:17:01
Message-ID: 20081231191701.GN12815@fetter.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 01:25:34PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > 2008/12/31 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
> >> 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.
> 
> > All should be GUC read only variables - It is cheep.
> 
> Not as cheap as a single added function.  If we need to provide
> these fields broken out --- and no one has demonstrated any need to
> do so --- then I'd support Alvaro's suggestion.

+1 for broken-out fields in columns per Alvaro.

Cheers,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-12-31 19:17:18
Subject: Re: pg_dump roles support [Review]
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2008-12-31 19:10:55
Subject: Re: TODO items for window functions

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