Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27A9CE6ED for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:07:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from adsltrust.ath.forthnet.gr ([194.219.204.174] helo=smadev.internal.net) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SfTQt-00016a-Me for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 10:07:14 +0000 Received: from smadev.internal.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smadev.internal.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5FA6wMR034228 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:06:58 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com) Received: (from achill@localhost) by smadev.internal.net (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q5FA6wfg034227 for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:06:58 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com) X-Authentication-Warning: smadev.internal.net: achill set sender to achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com using -f From: Achilleas Mantzios Organization: Dynacom Tankers Mgmt To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Insane behaviour in 8.3.3 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:06:58 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/8.3-RELEASE; KDE/4.7.3; amd64; ; ) References: <201206141139.35601.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201206151306.58865.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201206/44 X-Sequence-Number: 36698 On =CE=A0=CE=B1=CF=81 15 =CE=99=CE=BF=CF=85=CE=BD 2012 12:29:38 Samuel Gend= ler wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Samuel Gendler >=20 > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Achilleas Mantzios < > >=20 > > achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> wrote: > >> And i forgot to mention, minicom term emulation quality sucks, even > >> giving simple > >> shell commands is a PITA, upgrading the whole fleet would mean bast ca= se > >> scenario > >> minimum 21K USD for the whole fleet + suspension of all other activiti= es > >> for two months. > >> If physical travel was involved, the cost would be increased at even > >> higher levels. > >=20 > > And what is the cost of data corruption on large numbers of systems? A= nd > > how much to fix that, especially if multiple systems fail at the same > > time? > >=20 > > Some things aren't free. $21K in exchange for NOT having had to keep > >=20 > > systems up to date for 4 years seems like a decent trade. >=20 > Just call up an oracle sales rep and get a price quote for a single > baseline system. Put that next to the postgresql upgrade cost for your > whole fleet. :) I know, I have used this argument sometimes successfully, sometimes not. The problem with oracle is not the price. The problem is that it just canno= t do what postgresql does, or what we have managed to do ourselves with postgres= ql. Our replication system is unique, built in-house, and no commercial alterna= tive existed, exists, or (most probably) will exist. =2D Achilleas Mantzios IT DEPT