Обсуждение: pg_config --version

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка

pg_config --version

От
David Fetter
Дата:
Folks,

While updating some extensions, I noticed that pg_config --version
produces output that's...maybe not quite as useful as it might be, at
least to a machine, so I'd like to throw out some proposals to fix the
situation.
   Add a --version-numeric option to pg_config

or   Replace the current --version option with its bare numeric version

or   Add another line of output to the current --version output, which   would be the numeric version by itself

I'm partial to the first because it's clear what's being asked for,
the second because the product name does nothing for comprehension,
and the third because it would be less strain on things that already
parse the output.

A somewhat larger project, not sure whether it's worth doing, would be
to enable pg_config to print arbitrary combinations of the GUCs it
could know about.

What say?

Best,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate



Re: pg_config --version

От
Michael Paquier
Дата:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 9:16 AM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
> While updating some extensions, I noticed that pg_config --version
> produces output that's...maybe not quite as useful as it might be, at
> least to a machine, so I'd like to throw out some proposals to fix the
> situation.
>
>     Add a --version-numeric option to pg_config
>
> or
>     Replace the current --version option with its bare numeric version
>
> or
>     Add another line of output to the current --version output, which
>     would be the numeric version by itself
>
> What say?

You may want to look at this thread that treats more or less the same topic:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTAdAJpX8iK4V3uYJbO2Kmo8rHzqJKDsLaDdranNrGX_A@mail.gmail.com
And this has resulted in commit a5d489cc:
commit: a5d489ccb7e613c7ca3be6141092b8c1d2c13fa7
author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 17:24:36 -0400
Make numeric form of PG version number readily available in Makefiles.

I would imagine that the common position has not changed much since,
and as Makefile.global.in provides this data... Doing more work in
pg_config is not really necessary for extensions.
-- 
Michael



Re: pg_config --version

От
Jim Nasby
Дата:
On 11/27/16 12:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 17:24:36 -0400
> Make numeric form of PG version number readily available in Makefiles.

If you don't want to wait for that, you can use [1] in shell or Make to 
accomplish something similar. Looks like there is a dotted MAJORVERSION 
variable going back to at least 9.1, so I could have used that instead 
of PGVERSION on line 51.

1: https://github.com/decibel/pgxntool/blob/master/base.mk#L47-L56
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)



Re: pg_config --version

От
David Fetter
Дата:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 03:16:37PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 9:16 AM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
> > While updating some extensions, I noticed that pg_config --version
> > produces output that's...maybe not quite as useful as it might be, at
> > least to a machine, so I'd like to throw out some proposals to fix the
> > situation.
> >
> >     Add a --version-numeric option to pg_config
> >
> > or
> >     Replace the current --version option with its bare numeric version
> >
> > or
> >     Add another line of output to the current --version output, which
> >     would be the numeric version by itself
> >
> > What say?
> 
> You may want to look at this thread that treats more or less the same topic:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTAdAJpX8iK4V3uYJbO2Kmo8rHzqJKDsLaDdranNrGX_A@mail.gmail.com
> And this has resulted in commit a5d489cc:
> commit: a5d489ccb7e613c7ca3be6141092b8c1d2c13fa7
> author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 17:24:36 -0400
> Make numeric form of PG version number readily available in Makefiles.
> 
> I would imagine that the common position has not changed much since,
> and as Makefile.global.in provides this data... Doing more work in
> pg_config is not really necessary for extensions.

Thanks for the tip. :)

Since at least two people ran across this independently, perhaps more
documentation is in order.

Best,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate



Re: pg_config --version

От
David Fetter
Дата:
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 09:12:47AM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 11/27/16 12:16 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 17:24:36 -0400
> > Make numeric form of PG version number readily available in Makefiles.
> 
> If you don't want to wait for that,

I wonder whether a back-patch to 9.2 with that would be accepted...

> you can use [1] in shell

I'd like to make as few assumptions about build environments as I can.
I know for sure that people are building my things on platforms like
Windows that I have no way to test, but don't wish to break.

> or Make to accomplish something similar. Looks like there is a
> dotted MAJORVERSION variable going back to at least 9.1,

Good to know.  I guess I can rely on there being a GNU make...at least
for now.

> so I could have used that instead of PGVERSION on line 51.
> 1: https://github.com/decibel/pgxntool/blob/master/base.mk#L47-L56

Thanks for sharing :)

Best,
David.
-- 
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate