-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 01/26/07 17:28, Shane Ambler wrote: > Bill Moran wrote: >> I spend some time googling this and searching the Postgresql.org site, >> but >> I'm either not good enough with the search strings, or it's not to be >> found. >> >> I'm trying to plan upgrades so that we don't upgrade needlessly, but also >> don't get caught using stuff that nobody's supporting any more. >> The FreeBSD project keeps this schedule: >> http://www.freebsd.org/security/#adv >> which is _really_ nice when talking to managers and similar people about >> when upgrades need to be scheduled. >> >> Does the PostgreSQL project have any similar policy about EoLs? Even >> just >> a simple statement like, "it is our goal to support major branches for 2 >> years after release" or some such? >> > > There is no set time frame planned that I know of. > > It is more a matter of users that keep the old versions alive. Some with > large datasets on busy servers that can't allocate enough downtime to > upgrade tend to be keeping the older versions running. How much does the on-disk structure of *existing* tables and indexes change between x.y versions? Between, for example, 8.0 and 8.2? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFupB8S9HxQb37XmcRArvWAKCwTj6kDG6+rAa4vZ30PEQUkDHy5ACg7CZf 8PaPJuy6gYBuCo5JNdxgdBQ= =olUx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
