Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqQi4PuPv4hSnvQQfLr8zfzBWuL-mKvak1bmp8d-XQfaeg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Hm.  We're all agreed that there's a use case for exposing PG_VERSION_NUM
> to the makefiles, but I did not hear one for adding it to pg_config; and
> doing the former takes about two lines whereas adding a pg_config option
> entails quite a lot of overhead (documentation, translatable help text,
> yadda yadda).  So I'm not in favor of doing the latter without a much
> more solid case than has been made.

Well, I have no other cases than ones of the type mentioned upthread,
and honestly I am fine as long as we do not apply maths to a version
string. So attached is a patch that adds VERSION_NUM in
Makefile.global.
Regards,
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: Zero-padding and zero-masking fixes for to_char(float)
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal GSoC 2015 task: Allow access to the database via HTTP