Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 or 9.1 ?

From: Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>
To: "Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)" <bnicholson(at)hp(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 or 9.1 ?
Date: 2011-06-17 05:43:29
Message-ID: 201106170843.29889.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanx brad,
i think 9.0 would be the most wise decision for the time being.

Στις Thursday 16 June 2011 18:29:16 γράψατε:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-general-
> > owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Grzegorz Jaskiewicz
> > Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:05 AM
> > To: Achilleas Mantzios
> > Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL 9.0 or 9.1 ?
> >
> > It could be worth considering 9.1. Probably by the time you get
> > production ready version, 9.1 will be already stable (few months I
> > guess).
> > The usual answer to that question is - it will be ready when its ready.
> >
>
> I would also ask, what is your (and your managements) tolerance for risk, and do you actually need any of the new features and/or performance benefits in 9.1?
>
> Postgres does have an excellent track record for quality and stability with new releases, but a couple of months in the field isn't really considered stable in most places.
>
> Brad.
>

--
Achilleas Mantzios

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alban Hertroys 2011-06-17 06:42:59 Re: Constraint to ensure value does NOT exist in another table?
Previous Message Achilleas Mantzios 2011-06-17 05:42:14 Re: Fw: PostgreSQL 9.0 or 9.1 ?