Re: postgre vs MySQL
От | Russell Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgre vs MySQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 47D77FEA.90805@pws.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgre vs MySQL ("Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgre vs MySQL
Re: postgre vs MySQL |
Список | pgsql-general |
Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Justin <justin@emproshunts.com> wrote: > >> I view updates/patches of any kind like this, if ain't broke don't fix it. >> I normally only update computers with security patches only after i prove it >> don't destroy installs. >> > > But that's juast it. When a postgresql update comes out, it is > precisely because the database IS broken. A bug that might eat your > data or allow an attacker to get into your database are the kinds of > fixes, and the only kind really, that go into production pgsql > releases. I too wait a day or two to test it on a staging server, but > I've never had a pgsql update blow back in my face, and I've done an > awful lot of them. > So you missed 8.1.7 then or weren't using those features at the very least? You also didn't have the stats collector issue with 8.2.3, 8.2.4 took quite some time to come out. And remember the policy violation when 8.0 came out, we replaced the buffer expiry algorithm with a patch release. PostgreSQL is not perfect, but as you can see by the problems with 8.1.7 the next update was released very very quickly. Sometimes I fear we pump up our status a little too far with the reliability and only perfectly patched releases. The real key is what's the response when things go wrong, because things will go wrong at some point. I think we need to be careful because it's a much bigger fall the higher the pedestal we put ourselves on. Regards Russell
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: