Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C4164FCF6 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:06:01 -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 07303-04 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:05:54 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.236]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A6C764FCF3 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:05:54 -0300 (ADT) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so4034644rvf.43 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:05:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=/ZoBWkGQC16m7Z/yxigNduq/XcnQPlHcBTzKHlCiXoo=; b=VIyjBbSb8ej0ek0kjeCbCbv3Imrmhr4Yx7hGmsQT5MPF8PVVL+MK94bkzyK2RtCydf g6rnLROuivQym6suF955/V8ZMu8t6RGrtl3pbhETzRxrME9WkZbxxlix86eQCuj/pB1c +eoP5QKdf0N281qkxdhspHDeOwpHrf0JHpNTk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=QmioXTNAabwseHjn4IVEimv6JU8IPqvGkEejYFna60QSxwd7/Edw5NVgCBn+2Uw17/ xbeBVZEDspX2rZt6fB7VttGq6EMjdzPp6O5zvx6IrAFULnxyZpYjJRuEhAwK49SUdPkW /v5Guj3UgR51sKXzKEm7yOr1bE/NRRXZyEhtc= Received: by 10.141.42.10 with SMTP id u10mr113938rvj.141.1219856753804; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:05:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.197.1 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:05:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:05:53 -0600 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Andrew Sullivan" , pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Bug introduced in 8.0 In-Reply-To: <20080827165811.GG18946@commandprompt.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <15aa6b3e0808260421r1b97b7dfoa53fd6f04ffbd49b@mail.gmail.com> <20080826131023.GJ10936@commandprompt.com> <20080827165811.GG18946@commandprompt.com> 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: 200808/204 X-Sequence-Number: 30049 On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 08:46:33PM -0400, Lew wrote: >> upgrades to PG, it is our duty to inform our bosses of the risk of not >> upgrading, so they can properly assess risks and manage them accordingly. > > I agree. It is, by the same token, your duty to yourself to ensure > that, if the answer is, "No," you get that answer in writing so that > future failures are not possibly pinned on you as having been > negligent in installing stability and security releases. > > By the way, I always refer to these of late as "security and > stability" rather than "minor" releases. I do that because it > presents them to the target audience in a way that is understandable. > Those releases are, for the project, a maintenance burden and not a > way to introduce features. It's wise to keep that in mind when > presenting such releases to managers responsible for the decision. I used to work for an Oracle DBA and while he was quite smart in most ways, he really had been trained by Oracle to avoid anything but "patches". Upgrades / updates of a db were very scary for him. I had to present the minor updates as "patch releases" to get him comfortable with them. And have a full implementation plan and all that as well. But if instead he had insisted on running an outdated version of PostgreSQL for some goofy reason I would have been looking for another job. I guess I've been lucky in that I've never actually had to work for idiots. Sure have interviewed with quite a few though.