Re: New version numbering practices

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: New version numbering practices
Date: 2016-08-05 23:02:38
Message-ID: 1246.1470438158@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> One hiccup I found is that server_version_num is not sent to clients.
> Instead, libpq assembles the numeric version number itself from the
> string version, and it will fail if it sees only one number (e.g.,
> 10devel). It will then set the version number to 0 for "unknown".

Per discussion, I applied and back-patched the libpq/fe-exec.c part
of this, so that back-branch clients will have a decent chance of
understanding the new server_version format by the time it hits the field.

In a quick look around, it seemed like we might also want to fix and
back-patch the server version printing logic in psql's
connection_warnings() function. However that would involve touching
a translatable string so I thought it best not to do it just before
back-branch releases.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2016-08-06 00:07:18 Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2016-08-05 22:51:05 Re: Heap WARM Tuples - Design Draft