Re: The case for version number inflation

On 02/27/2013 04:48 PM, Selena Deckelmann wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
> <mailto:josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>> wrote:
>
>
> And you're probably aware of the issue with Amazon Linux, where they
> don't distinguish between version 9.1 and 9.2 and thus corrupt people's
> databases.

How is this even possible? PG_VERSION is very clear about what version
is actually running. If Amazon does that, I have a feeling we aren't
doing what we are supposed to do and refusing to start on a mismatched
version.

>
>
> This seems like a case to be made for Postgres to respond more elegantly
> to this situation, possibly by converting blocks on the fly to the newer
> version of the database for writes and being ok with reading previous
> versions of blocks, or simply not writing data to the filesystem when
> the versions don't match.

See above.

> I'll not weigh in on the version number inflation. Seems like a lot of
> epic bikeshedding.

Maybe, and probably considering it comes up every few releases since
1997. :P

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC
@cmdpromptinc - 509-416-6579