Hello Tom,
>> I understand that you would prefer VERSION_NAME to show something like
>> "11devel, server 9.6.4"
> No, that's not what I said. I'm just complaining that as the patch stands
> it will set SERVER_NAME to "11.0", where I think it should say "11devel"
> (as of today).
Ok.
> [...]
> VERSION "PostgreSQL 11devel on ..."
> CLIENT_VERSION_NAME "11devel"
> CLIENT_VERSION_NUM 110000
This kind of inconsistencies is hard for human memory:-(
> or just leaving "CLIENT" implicit for all of these variables:
>
> VERSION "PostgreSQL 11devel on ..."
> VERSION_NAME "11devel"
> VERSION_NUM 110000
That is already what the patch does, because of the VERSION precedent.
> Robert seems to prefer the last of those, and that'd be fine with me.
> (Note that CLIENT is ambiguous anyway: does it mean psql itself, or
> libpq?)
Hmmm. Indeed.
>> SERVER_VERSION_NAME "9.6.4"
>> SERVER_VERSION_NUM 090604
>
> I'm on board with this, except I don't think we should have any leading
> zero in the numeric form. There are contexts where somebody might think
> that means octal.
Indeed. The implementation already does this, I just typed it without
checking.
So basically the only thing needed from Robert & you seems to change
"11.0" to "11devel", which is fine with me.
The attached v5 does that.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
