Message-ID: <5174F420.7070002@wp.pl>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:26:08 +0200
From: Ireneusz Pluta <ipluta@wp.pl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
CC: sunil virmani <sunhcl@gmail.com>,
	"pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: - why only 9.1?
References: 
 <CAORdsyv_BCqrVBBXvtmsGVzHnmcs18iPp1cVMkYs8PuNBuEP9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOR=d=2+1G_35+Z+mcDPies8mSQwaWvhFRjM+0SGaHz2oym=Wg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOR=d=2+1G_35+Z+mcDPies8mSQwaWvhFRjM+0SGaHz2oym=Wg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

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