Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8(at)verizon(dot)net>:
>> Decibel! wrote:
>>> On Nov 18, 2007, at 1:26 PM, gabor wrote:
>>>> hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 10:40:43AM +0100, Gábor Farkas wrote:
>>>>>> we are moving one database from postgresql-7.4 to postgresql-8.2.4.
>>>>> any particular reason why not 8.2.5?
>>>> the distribution i use only has 8.2.4 currently.
>>> Then I think you need to consider abandoning your distribution's
>>> packages or find a better distribution. IIRC, 8.2.5 is over 2-3 months
>>> old now; there's no reason a distribution shouldn't have it at this
>>> point. (Unless of course you haven't kept your distribution
>>> up-to-date... ;)
>> Some people run distributions such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 (their
>> latest); I do. postgresql that comes with that.
>> Now once they pick a version of a program, they seldom change it. They do
>> put security and bug fixes in it by back-porting the changes into the source
>> code and rebuilding it. I guess for postgresql the changes were too much for
>> backporting, so they upgraded from postgresql-8.1.4-1.1 that came with it
>> originally and are now up to postgresql-8.1.9-1.el5. I am pretty sure they
>> will never upgrade RHEL5 to the 8.2 series because they do not do it to get
>> new features.
>> Now you may think there are better distributions than Red Hat Enterprise
>> Linux 5, but enough people seem to think it good enough to pay for it and
>> keep Red Hat in business. I doubt they are all foolish.
> I think you've missed the point.
I think you are right.
> The discussion is not that the distro is bad because it hasn't moved from
> 8.1 -> 8.2. The comment is that it's bad because it hasn't updated a
> major branch with the latest bug fixes. i.e. it hasn't moved from 8.1.4
> to 8.1.5.
> If this is indeed the case, I agree that such a distro isn't worth using.
... and I can keep RHEL5 because they went from 8.1.4 to 8.1.9. ;-)
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 10:40:01 up 27 days, 3:58, 2 users, load average: 4.43, 4.85, 5.17
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2007-11-19 17:18:59|
|Subject: Re: autovacuum: recommended?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-11-19 15:23:18|
|Subject: Re: autovacuum: recommended? |