Обсуждение: pgsql: Add pg_postmaster_start_time() function.

Log Message:
-----------
Add pg_postmaster_start_time() function.

Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Matthias Schmidt

Modified Files:
--------------
    pgsql/doc/src/sgml:
        func.sgml (r1.254 -> r1.255)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml.diff?r1=1.254&r2=1.255)
    pgsql/src/backend/postmaster:
        postmaster.c (r1.452 -> r1.453)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/postmaster.c.diff?r1=1.452&r2=1.453)
    pgsql/src/backend/tcop:
        postgres.c (r1.447 -> r1.448)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/tcop/postgres.c.diff?r1=1.447&r2=1.448)
    pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt:
        timestamp.c (r1.124 -> r1.125)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c.diff?r1=1.124&r2=1.125)
    pgsql/src/include/catalog:
        pg_proc.h (r1.366 -> r1.367)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/include/catalog/pg_proc.h.diff?r1=1.366&r2=1.367)
    pgsql/src/include/utils:
        timestamp.h (r1.43 -> r1.44)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/include/utils/timestamp.h.diff?r1=1.43&r2=1.44)

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Add pg_postmaster_start_time() function.

You should have bumped the catversion, no?

-Neil

Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Add pg_postmaster_start_time() function.
>
> You should have bumped the catversion, no?

Yes, thanks, done.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Add pg_postmaster_start_time() function.

> You should have bumped the catversion, no?

Probably, but it's not essential since nothing depends on that pg_proc
entry being there.  If, for instance, he'd added a regression test
using it then a catversion bump would be required IMHO.

I had a similar situation a few days ago when I was taking out the unary
% and ^ operators: a catversion bump could have been called for, but I
felt it was OK to not do it.  Running with the old pg_operator contents
wouldn't have any ill effects.

Part of the reason for being lazy here is that I'm quite sure there will
be more catversion bumps before 8.1 goes final; so the only question is
whether anyone's development installation is likely to fail if they run
an updated postmaster without initdb'ing.  If I thought these might be
the last catalog changes before a release, I'd want a catversion bump
so we could be certain everyone running a release postmaster has release
catalogs.

            regards, tom lane