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

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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: 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 15:49:03
Message-ID: 26761.1230738543@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

I didn't actually see a user request for finding out the pointer width,
either, but if there is one then Bruce's proposal seems fine.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-12-31 15:54:07
Subject: Re: version() output vs. 32/64 bits
Previous:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2008-12-31 13:28:26
Subject: Re: Lockfree hashtables

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