Re: 10.0

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 10.0
Date: 2016-06-17 05:58:18
Message-ID: CAMsr+YG7xMKZDLPYa4HqdmB1N_zx2gn-atmcLQE6O2gpkuf3QQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 15 June 2016 at 06:48, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

>
> ​We could stand to be more explicit here. The docs for version()
> indicated the server_version_num should be used for "machine processing".
>
> The implied correct way to access the canonical server version is thus:
>
> SELECT current_setting('server_version_num');
>
>
Or get server_version from the GUC_REPORT params sent at connect-time,
avoiding a round-trip. That's how drivers do it.

Client application should just ask their driver, they shouldn't need to be
poking around to get the version directly.

It'd be better if server_version_num was also GUC_REPORT, but it isn't. I
still think it should be.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

  • Re: 10.0 at 2016-06-14 22:48:08 from David G. Johnston

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-06-17 06:01:31 Re: 10.0
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2016-06-17 04:15:25 Re: New design for FK-based join selectivity estimation