Re: Is Diskeeper Automatic Mode safe?
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Is Diskeeper Automatic Mode safe? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B027BE3.1020505@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Is Diskeeper Automatic Mode safe? (cb <cb@mythtech.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Is Diskeeper Automatic Mode safe?
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
cb wrote: > My understanding is, before I joined the company, they did an upgrade > from 7 on Linux to 8 on Windows and got bit by some change in PG that > broke a bunch of code. After that, they have just refused to budge > from the 8.0.4 version we are on and know the code works against. Yes; that's one of the reasons there was a major version number bump there. That's a completely normal and expected issue to run into. A similar problem would happen if they tried to upgrade to 8.3 or later from 8.0--you can expect the app to break due to a large change made in 8.3. Sounds to me like the app doesn't really work against the version you're running against now though, from the issues you described. Which brings us to the PostgreSQL patching philosophy, which they may not be aware of. Upgrades to later 8.0 releases will contain *nothing* but bug and security fixes. The basic guideline for changes made as part of the small version number changes (8.0.1 to 8.0.2 for example) are that the bug must be more serious than the potential to cause a regression introduced by messing with things. You shouldn't get anything by going to 8.0.22 but fixes to real problems. A behavior change that broke code would be quite unexpected--the primary way you might run into one is by writing code that expects buggy behavior that then breaks. That's not a very common situation though, whereas the way they got bit before was beyond common--as I said, it was expected to happen. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: