pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedRunning 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
6+ messages / 5 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
@ 2010-09-28 19:22 Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
2010-09-28 19:50 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Michael Gould <mgould@intermodalsoftwaresolutions.net>
2010-09-28 20:45 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
2010-10-27 15:19 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tory M Blue @ 2010-09-28 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
I'm doing an OS upgrade and have been sitting on 8.4.3 for sometime. I
was wondering if it's better for the short term just to bring things
to 8.4.4 and let 9.0 bake a bit longer, or are people with large data
sets running 9.0 in production already?
Just looking for 9.0 feedback (understand it's still quite new).
Thanks
Tory
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
@ 2010-09-28 19:50 ` Michael Gould <mgould@intermodalsoftwaresolutions.net>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Michael Gould @ 2010-09-28 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>; pgsql-performance
Tory,
We will continue to test under 9.0 but will keep production at 8.4.4 for a
while longer as we want to see what kinds of issues show up over the next
few weeks with 9.0. 9.0 has some features we would like to use but it isn't
worth the risk of production. I think that the PostGres team has one of the
best develop and test cycle management systems but there is always things
that are going to pop up after a release. It just depends on the level of
pain your willing to suffer. It seems that the developers are able to track
down and kill bugs in a timely manner so I would expect to see a 9.0.1
version in the near future. At that point we'll start doing a lot more tire
kicking.
Best Regards
Mike Gould
"Tory M Blue" <tmblue@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm doing an OS upgrade and have been sitting on 8.4.3 for sometime. I
> was wondering if it's better for the short term just to bring things
> to 8.4.4 and let 9.0 bake a bit longer, or are people with large data
> sets running 9.0 in production already?
>
> Just looking for 9.0 feedback (understand it's still quite new).
>
> Thanks
> Tory
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
>
--
Michael Gould, Managing Partner
Intermodal Software Solutions, LLC
904.226.0978
904.592.5250 fax
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
@ 2010-09-28 20:45 ` Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
2010-09-28 22:14 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg Smith @ 2010-09-28 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
Tory M Blue wrote:
> I'm doing an OS upgrade and have been sitting on 8.4.3 for sometime. I
> was wondering if it's better for the short term just to bring things
> to 8.4.4 and let 9.0 bake a bit longer, or are people with large data
> sets running 9.0 in production already?
>
I'm aware of two people with large data sets who have been running 9.0
in production since it was in beta. Like most code, what you have to
consider is how much the code path you expect to use each day has been
modified during the previous release. If you're using 9.0 as "a better
8.4", the odds of your running into a problem are on the low side of the
risk curve. But those using the features that are both new and were
worked on until the very end of the development cycle, like the new
replication features, they are much more likely to run into a bug.
There are two main things I've been advising clients to be very careful
about when considering an early 9.0 upgrade mainly as a straight
replacement for 8.4 (making it possible to start testing the replication
stuff too, but not relying on that immediately). The changes to
acceptable PL/pgSQL syntax can easily break some existing procedures;
easy to fix if you find them in testing, but you if you have a lot of
functions in that language you should really do a code audit along with
testing.
The other is that query plans are much more likely to use Materialize
nodes now in ways they never did before. That planning change will be
long-term positive, but I expect to see some short-term performance
regressions in plans that used to work better; not because of the code
itself, just because of Murphy's Law. This is similar to how the hash
aggregation changes made to 8.4 could produce worse plans under
unexpected circumstances than what people saw in 8.3 and earlier, which
is something else you're also exposed to here if your existing code is
running on 8.4. There are less of those situations in the recent 8.4
releases than the early ones, but the possibility of aggressive hashing
being worse than the older approach still happens. I've seen exactly
one of them on a production server running 8.4, and the problem had
already been reported to the relevant list before I got there.
--
Greg Smith, 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
Author, "PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance" Pre-ordering at:
https://www.packtpub.com/postgresql-9-0-high-performance/book
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
2010-09-28 20:45 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
@ 2010-09-28 22:14 ` Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2010-09-28 22:52 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Guy Rouillier @ 2010-09-28 22:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-performance
On 9/28/2010 4:45 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Tory M Blue wrote:
>> I'm doing an OS upgrade and have been sitting on 8.4.3 for sometime. I
>> was wondering if it's better for the short term just to bring things
>> to 8.4.4 and let 9.0 bake a bit longer, or are people with large data
>> sets running 9.0 in production already?
>
> I'm aware of two people with large data sets who have been running 9.0
> in production since it was in beta. Like most code, what you have to
> consider is how much the code path you expect to use each day has been
> modified during the previous release. If you're using 9.0 as "a better
> 8.4", the odds of your running into a problem are on the low side of the
> risk curve. But those using the features that are both new and were
> worked on until the very end of the development cycle, like the new
> replication features, they are much more likely to run into a bug.
A conservative approach is never to use version x.0 of *anything*. The
PG developers are very talented (and also very helpful on these mailing
lists - thanks for that), but they are human. For work I'm paid to do
(as opposed to my own or charity work), I like to stay at least one
point release behind the bleeding edge.
--
Guy Rouillier
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
2010-09-28 20:45 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
2010-09-28 22:14 ` Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
@ 2010-09-28 22:52 ` Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tory M Blue @ 2010-09-28 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/28/2010 4:45 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>>
>> Tory M Blue wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm doing an OS upgrade and have been sitting on 8.4.3 for sometime. I
>>> was wondering if it's better for the short term just to bring things
>>> to 8.4.4 and let 9.0 bake a bit longer, or are people with large data
>>> sets running 9.0 in production already?
>>
>> I'm aware of two people with large data sets who have been running 9.0
>> in production since it was in beta. Like most code, what you have to
>> consider is how much the code path you expect to use each day has been
>> modified during the previous release. If you're using 9.0 as "a better
>> 8.4", the odds of your running into a problem are on the low side of the
>> risk curve. But those using the features that are both new and were
>> worked on until the very end of the development cycle, like the new
>> replication features, they are much more likely to run into a bug.
>
> A conservative approach is never to use version x.0 of *anything*. The PG
> developers are very talented (and also very helpful on these mailing lists -
> thanks for that), but they are human. For work I'm paid to do (as opposed
> to my own or charity work), I like to stay at least one point release behind
> the bleeding edge.
>
> --
> Guy RouillierG
Thanks guys, truly appreciate the length to which you replied. I like
hearing the theory and reasoning behind ones decision.
It sounds like my general theory of waiting is shared amongst the
group. I can't really absorb large issues in production, so I'll throw
the .4 release of 8.4 out and be happy for a while.
I'm using slony, so it will take a ton of testing and time to look
over and test the 9.0 replication piece, if I even consider making
that jump.
Thanks for the input, it's appreciated
Tory
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while?
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
@ 2010-10-27 15:19 ` Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Francisco Reyes @ 2010-10-27 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-performance
Tory M Blue writes:
> Just looking for 9.0 feedback (understand it's still quite new).
Although not 9.0 feedback per se.. but something to consider...
I am moving a number of machines from 8.1 to 8.4.
We use a rolling procedure with a spare:
machine A running 8.1
machine B is prepped with 8.4
change names and IPs
keep old A for a bit just in case...
The last replacement we noticed a big regression in performance. Upon
inspection the machine we replaced was 3.7.. Both 8.X and 8.X have serious
problems with a particualr query (dealing with it on performance now).
So I guess what I am trying to say... you need to test with your own data
set. That lone 8.3.7 machine was literally a fluke. We were going to move
all 8.1 to 8.4.. but at one point did one in 8.3. If we had not done that we
would not have noticed that both 8.1 and 8.4 have problems with some of our
queries.
I am even leaning now to have a lab with 8.3 for testing queries.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-10-27 15:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-09-28 19:22 Running 9 in production? Sticking with 8.4.4 for a while? Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
2010-09-28 19:50 ` Michael Gould <mgould@intermodalsoftwaresolutions.net>
2010-09-28 20:45 ` Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
2010-09-28 22:14 ` Guy Rouillier <guyr-ml1@burntmail.com>
2010-09-28 22:52 ` Tory M Blue <tmblue@gmail.com>
2010-10-27 15:19 ` Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox