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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx www.2ndQuadrant.us
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
