Re: 9.6beta3

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: rob stone <floriparob(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 9.6beta3
Date: 2016-07-29 16:15:29
Message-ID: 15623.1469808929@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

rob stone <floriparob(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> So, could somebody tell me if the 9.6beta1 version of initdb contained
> an incorrect version constant?

It did, see

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=99dd8b05aa5647a59f30ca67e67e2e3377f50094

You would have had to do an initdb or pg_upgrade for the new version
anyway because of other catalog changes.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • 9.6beta3 at 2016-07-29 16:06:39 from rob stone

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vitaly Burovoy 2016-07-29 16:20:31 Re: Using timestamp(tz) in C functions
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-07-29 16:10:24 Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3