Re: pg_upgrade docs are confusing if PostgreSQL's versioning system/language isn't known to reader

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:35:09AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Friday, January 26, 2018, Jim Ryan <jim(at)room118solutions(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hey Bruce,
>
> Thanks for working on this, but wouldn't pg_upgrade be needed from 10.1 to
> 10.2?  Aren't those considered major versions, or am I misunderstanding?
>
> The source of my (and potentially others) confusion is if from 9.1 to 9.2
> is considered a major version change or not.  I think most users would
> assume from 9.x to 10.x is a major version change.  The ambiguity is in 9.x
> to 9.y.  
>
>
>
> Which is why we changed ;)
>
> Starting with 10 the one and only value after the decimal is a minor version
> bug fix release.  The next major version will be 11.
>
> Of versions beginning with 9 there were 7 major versions - 9.0 to 9.6; the
> third position value denoted the minor bug fix release.
>
> pg-upgrade is only required for upgrading between major versions.
>
> On our homeoage we list every major release that is currently supported.

I decided I needed to be more explicit about the major version numbers
so I have added major and minor examples for the 9.6.x series and 10.x
series releases. Patch attached.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +