Hi,
I think it should be addressed with [1] in all branches (2.4, 2.5 and trunk),
so the patch will be included in the next minor releases.
1 - https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/changeset/17179
Regards,
--
Raúl Marín Rodríguez
carto.com
___
postgis-users
I've created https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/4296
--
Raúl Marín Rodríguez
carto.com
___
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:48 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez
wrote:
> > I don't think we have faced this issue with upgrade in the past...
>
> Before PG11, Postgis didn't need to check the Postgresql release at runtime
> in the SQL code. As a reference, in the function `_postgis_pgsql_version`
> we are d
> I don't think we have faced this issue with upgrade in the past...
Before PG11, Postgis didn't need to check the Postgresql release at runtime
in the SQL code. As a reference, in the function `_postgis_pgsql_version`
we are doing the same pattern matching (`PostgreSQL ([0-9\.]+)`).
I think we s
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:57 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez
wrote:
> > We are testing with EnterpriseDB's version of PG but in PG it would be
> PostgreSQL 10.6.
>
> Does EnterpriseDB's fork change the output of version(). If so, that's
> the issue.
>
That's the string...
EnterpriseDB 10.6.13
I don't
> We are testing with EnterpriseDB's version of PG but in PG it would be
> PostgreSQL 10.6.
Does EnterpriseDB's fork change the output of version(). If so, that's
the issue.
--
Raúl Marín Rodríguez
carto.com
___
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-user
Hi Ashan,
are you able to provide the exact string being reported to 'select
version()'? A screen shot or photo will be good. (rephrased "it's going to
be ..." not.)
пн, 14 янв. 2019 г. в 14:46, Ahsan Hadi :
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:15 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez <
> rmrodrig...@carto.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:15 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez
wrote:
> > it is PG 10.6
>
> Can you share the full string? It seems there is an issue with the
> pattern matching.
>
We are testing with EnterpriseDB's version of PG but in PG it would be
PostgreSQL 10.6.
It seems that it is looking for a ca
> it is PG 10.6
Can you share the full string? It seems there is an issue with the
pattern matching.
--
Raúl Marín Rodríguez
carto.com
___
postgis-users mailing list
postgis-users@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 3:53 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez
wrote:
> What does `Select version()` show?
>
it is PG 10.6
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:46 AM Ahsan Hadi
> wrote:
> >
> > Select CASE WHEN split_part(s,'.',1)::integer > 9 THEN
> > db1-# split_part(s,'.',1) || '0' ELSE split_part(s,'.',
What does `Select version()` show?
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:46 AM Ahsan Hadi wrote:
>
> Select CASE WHEN split_part(s,'.',1)::integer > 9 THEN
> db1-# split_part(s,'.',1) || '0' ELSE split_part(s,'.', 1) ||
> db1-# split_part(s,'.', 2) END AS v
> db1-# FROM substring(version(), 'PostgreSQL ([0-
Select CASE WHEN split_part(s,'.',1)::integer > 9 THEN
db1-# split_part(s,'.',1) || '0' ELSE split_part(s,'.', 1) ||
db1-# split_part(s,'.', 2) END AS v
db1-# FROM substring(version(), 'PostgreSQL ([0-9\.]+)') AS s;
v
---
(1 row)
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 2:35 PM Raúl Marín Rodríguez
wrote:
> Hi
Hi Ahsan,
It seems there is some error with the version detection mechanism as
it's detecting PG11+.
Can you please check what's the output of:
{{{
Select CASE WHEN split_part(s,'.',1)::integer > 9 THEN
split_part(s,'.',1) || '0' ELSE split_part(s,'.', 1) ||
split_part(s,'.', 2) END AS v
FROM sub
Hi,
I have trying to upgrade from postgis 2.4.1 to postgis 2.4.6 for PG 10
sever. I am getting the following error when doing in alter command..
*ALTER EXTENSION postgis_topology UPDATE;*
ERROR: column proc.prokind does not exist
LINE 15: ... = 'e' and e.extname = $1 and c.relname = $2 AND (proc
14 matches
Mail list logo
