Re: Partitions and work_mem?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Partitions and work_mem? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22717.1413413894@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Partitions and work_mem? (Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Partitions and work_mem?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Igor Neyman <ineyman@perceptron.com> writes: > From: Dave Johansen [mailto:davejohansen@gmail.com] > This conversation has probably become a bit off topic, but my understanding is that what you're paying RedHat for is astable platform for a long period of time. That means creating/backporting of fixes for security and other critical issuesfor packages that have been EOLed. > Assuming the above is true, (which I beleve to be the case https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata ), Idon't see what would prevent RedHat from making a patch and applying it to the latest 8.4 release to resolve any newly discoveredissues. Isn't that the whole point of open source and RedHat being able to do with the code what it wishes as longas it meets the requirements of the license? So are you claiming that RedHat doesn't/won't do this? Is incapable of doingthis? Or am I missing something? > Tom Lane is probably better authority on this issue. > Let’s wait and see what he says. That is in fact exactly what people pay Red Hat to do, and it was my job to do it for Postgres when I worked there. I don't work there any more, but I'm sure my replacement is entirely capable of back-patching fixes as needed. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: