Re: autovacuum: recommended?

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.

Luckily I do not seem to be troubled by the problems experienced by the O.P.

I do know that if I try to use .rpms from other sources, I can get in a lot
of trouble with incompatible libraries. And I cannot upgrade the libraries
without damaging other programs.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 08:20:01 up 27 days, 1:38, 1 user, load average: 5.15, 5.20, 5.01