| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuzzy substring searching with the pg_trgm extension |
| Date: | 2016-01-13 20:37:01 |
| Message-ID: | 25977.1452717421@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> In the meantime, I had a question about bumping the version to 1.3.
> Version 1.2 of pg_trgm has never been included in a community release
> (because it didn't make the 9.5 cutoff). So should we really bump the
> version to 1.3, or just merge the changes here directly into the
> existing 1.2 HEAD code?
> I think it would be pretty odd for 9.5. to come with pg_trgm 1.1 and
> for 9.6 to come with pg_trgm 1.3.
+1 for not bumping the version, if we've not shipped 1.2 yet. There's
enough maintenance overhead in an extension version bump that we should
not do one unnecessarily.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-01-13 22:00:23 | Re: Weird behavior during CREATE EXTENSION |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-01-13 20:05:51 | Re: pg_dump and premature optimizations for objects not to be dumped |