Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278F264FCCA
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:39:20 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 37838-04 for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:39:17 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F1864FCCF
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:39:17 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m8HLcnI9028413;
	Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:38:49 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Guido Barosio" <gbarosio@gmail.com>
cc: "Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>,
	"Kenneth Marshall" <ktm@rice.edu>, Vivek_Sharan <Vivek_Sharan@infosys.com>,
	"pgsql-admin@postgresql.org" <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Heavy postgres process 
In-reply-to: <f7f6b4c70809171243l72951796l94e3212f05829f00@mail.gmail.com> 
References: 
 <5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B938345031E95B93@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com>
	<5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933AB6@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com>
	<dcc563d10809150853t1cd4cc44ja6ad5f7b63ce975a@mail.gmail.com>
	<5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933C33@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com>
	<f7f6b4c70809160737l6e05616fgdc7c5e72ed19c582@mail.gmail.com>
	<5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933E11@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com>
	<f7f6b4c70809170608y1d2a7804p3af6b516ba83ab9@mail.gmail.com>
	<5465CC59A600E2408FFBF84350B9383450F4933E18@AUSMELMBX01.ad.infosys.com>
	<20080917183155.GA22468@it.is.rice.edu>
	<dcc563d10809171158m4e9bc06ao76e2361687400c1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7f6b4c70809171243l72951796l94e3212f05829f00@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Guido Barosio" <gbarosio@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:43:46 -0300"
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:38:49 -0400
Message-ID: <28412.1221687529@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200809/188
X-Sequence-Number: 30281

"Guido Barosio" <gbarosio@gmail.com> writes:
> Getting to the latest 7.4 server involves the same as going to the
> latest 8.x server, AFAIK, if we take in consideration that 7.4.8
> requires a dump & restore (meaning downtime).

(a) it does *not* require a dump and restore

(b) if you ignore the recommendations in the 7.4.8 notes and just
upgrade without doing anything else, then what you will have is a
7.4 system that still contains two security vulnerabilities.
Vulnerabilities that are in your 7.4.5 system today.  How are you
worse off?

This is about the lamest excuse for not updating I've ever heard.

			regards, tom lane