Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E80F9FA462;
	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:13:07 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 72340-10; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:12:39 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from developer.pgadmin.org (developer.pgadmin.org [63.246.23.140])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775FC9FB7E2;
	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:12:38 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [172.24.32.110] ([62.232.55.118]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by developer.pgadmin.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l3AEA83F032462
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:10:10 GMT
Message-ID: <461B9B4F.4070208@postgresql.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:12:31 +0100
From: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Macintosh/20070221)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
	Andrew Hammond <andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com>,
	CAJ CAJ <pguser@gmail.com>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-www <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] programmatic way to fetch latest release
	for a given major.minor version
References: <5a0a9d6f0704091534i4e4af90co2dad0e9e0b60efee@mail.gmail.com>
	<461B3E6A.8080007@postgresql.org>
	<20070410081558.GB24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B5064.8010004@postgresql.org>
	<20070410101852.GC24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B6F10.3040800@postgresql.org>
	<20070410111509.GF24976@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B768A.8070402@postgresql.org>
	<20070410122708.GB25739@svr2.hagander.net>
	<461B8D60.6080004@postgresql.org>
	<20070410135708.GA7786@alvh.no-ip.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070410135708.GA7786@alvh.no-ip.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.2
OpenPGP: url=http://www.pgadmin.org/pgp/davepage.pgp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200704/30
X-Sequence-Number: 11780

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dave Page escribió:
>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> That is actually precisely my point. It makes *no sense* to filter based on
>>> 8.x. 8.0 is no more a major release than 7.4. 
>> Yes it is - that's precisely why it was 8.0 and not 7.5.
> 
> That was merely a marketing artifact; it was called 7.5 until the very
> end of the devel cycle.
> 

Yes, but marketing is one reason why someone might want to group 8.x,
7.x etc on a website which is exactly the sort of thing this code is for.

As others have said, yes, you could do it but looking at a substring of
the version, and yes, you could do it with mathematical comparisons on
major.minor (with limitations - what happens if we get to 8.10 ?), but
would we suggest people use those techniques for searching their
databases for matching records, or would we suggest storing the
interesting elements in different columns for ease of use, flexibility
and efficiency? How does this differ (aside from the obvious)?

Regards, Dave