On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 3:11 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/30/21 2:58 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 3:29 PM Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope@jackdb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 5:09 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I would suggest modeling the query after what we are doing with the RSS
> >>> feed[2].
> >>
> >>
> >> Done. Updated patch is attached.
> >>
> >> It also renames some output fields ("tree" as "major" and "latestminor" as "minor") and adds a sort order on the
JSONfields to ensure stable output.
> >>
> >> $ curl -s http://localhost:8000/versions.json | jq last
> >> {
> >> "current": false,
> >> "eoldate": "2014-07-01",
> >> "major": "8.4",
> >> "minor": 0,
> >> "reldate": "2009-07-01",
> >> "supported": true
> >> }
> >
> > I like the idea, btu a few comments:
> >
> > * Why do we care about sorting the keys? Not that it matters much, but
> > it mostly seems a bit silly, but if there is a reasoning behind it
> > there's no problem -- I'd just like to know what the reasoning is.
> >
> > * It reports major version as "13.0", not "13". It's correct for
> > versions prior to 10.
>
> Then this needs to be corrected:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/
>
> "Minor releases are numbered by increasing the last part of the version
> number. Beginning with PostgreSQL 10, this is the second part of the
> version number, e.g. 10.0 to 10.1; for older versions this is the third
> part of the version number, e.g. 9.5.3 to 9.5.4."
I don't understand what you mean. That one is correct, isn't it? For
13.3 for example, "13" is the major version and "13.3" is the minor
version. There is no "13.0" involved. And that's exactly what this
text says?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
