From: Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta@wp.pl>
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Cc: sunil virmani <sunhcl@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: - why only 9.1?
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:26:08 +0200
Message-ID: <5174F420.7070002@wp.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOR=d=2+1G_35+Z+mcDPies8mSQwaWvhFRjM+0SGaHz2oym=Wg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAORdsyv_BCqrVBBXvtmsGVzHnmcs18iPp1cVMkYs8PuNBuEP9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOR=d=2+1G_35+Z+mcDPies8mSQwaWvhFRjM+0SGaHz2oym=Wg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>
W dniu 2013-04-21 19:28, Scott Marlowe pisze:
>> My DB version is little old - 8.1.18.
> Well upgrade as soon as possible. 9.1 is pretty darn stable.
Scott,
excuse me this somewhat off-topic question.
Good to hear that 9.1 is so stable, because this is what I currently use in production. But why I
still use it, is only because I failed to manage my task to migrate to 9.2, so far. Anyway, this
task in on my long-term agenda.
So, let me understand why, as you recommend the OP upgrading, you only mention the 9.1, while there
have already been a few releases of 9.2. Isn't 9.2 stable enough?
Best regards
Irek.
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: ipluta@wp.pl, scott.marlowe@gmail.com, sunhcl@gmail.com
Subject: Re: - why only 9.1?
In-Reply-To: <5174F420.7070002@wp.pl>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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