From: | usleepless(at)gmail(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Wild idea: 9.0? |
Date: | 2007-04-23 22:03:59 |
Message-ID: | c39ec84c0704231503r2c920dbbw638e304d4879180f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Josh, List,
On 4/23/07, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Hackers,
>
> I was thinking about the upcoming release on my 32-hour epic airplane ordeal,
> and realizing that it changes PostgreSQL in a lot of ways. Between major
> improvements to performance, major changes to the file format, and changes to
> implicit conversions breaking backwards compatibility, our new ability to
> more-or-less stick to deadlines ...
>
> ... should this be 9.0 instead of 8.3?
>
> Seems like it'd be both an annoucement of how far we've come, as well as a
> warning to users that the 8.2-->9.0 upgrade could be painful. And that some
> of our more radical features in the new version could have some rough edges.
as a casual user, only subscribed to this list, i think you should
really consider it.
a bunch of problems due toa minor-release-number upgrade would come
as a suprise.
a major-release-number- upgrade i would investigate more thorough.
regards,
usleep
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-04-23 22:17:47 | Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-23 21:57:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-04-23 22:05:19 | Re: RETURN QUERY in PL/PgSQL? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-23 21:57:37 | Re: [HACKERS] Wild idea: 9.0? |