Re: Native DB replication for PG

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:42 -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
>
>>>> If I had to plan server deployments for the next year (and I do) I'd
>>>> be sticking with pg 8.3 and a proven replication engine. Next summer
>>>>
>>> Surely you mean 8.4? :-)
>>>
>
> No, I would buy the 8.3 argument as well. Depending on your conservative
> level. 8.4 is fine and all but 8.3 is about as rock solid as it gets.

Unless you don't vacuum enough on a bigger database, run out of FSM
pages, and the whole vacuum strategy goes to hell afterwards. I would
say that running into that issue is *probable* for an 8.3 install of any
significant size, whereas the odds of running into a regression in 8.4
relative to 8.3 is pretty low. The whole "the older version is always
more reliable" mantra doesn't make sense when you've got a major known
issue in the older release that just goes away by using the newer one,
and I feel that's the case with 8.4 vs. 8.3.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us