Re: [HACKERS] Location of PG_CATALOG_VERSION - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Location of PG_CATALOG_VERSION
Date
Msg-id 63987.1495416497@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Location of PG_CATALOG_VERSION  (Vicky Vergara <vicky_vergara@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Vicky Vergara <vicky_vergara@hotmail.com> writes:
> From this message:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1585.1472410329%40sss.pgh.pa.us
> I deduced that in the code I can use
> PG_CATALOG_VERSION

No, sorry, thinko on my part.  It's CATALOG_VERSION_NO, from
<catalog/catversion.h>, that people usually use for this sort of thing.
That gives you finer grain than PG_VERSION would, although that only
matters if you're concerned about working with development versions.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vicky Vergara
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Location of PG_CATALOG_VERSION
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Fix a typo in hash.c