On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Sure, at some point in 2010, we may reach a point where it would be ill > advised to build a new system using RHEL5/PG8.1. I was suggesting more that > there are completely reasonable reasons to deploy 8.1 even right now in > 2009, and people are doing so. That gives the release a lot more future > than 7.4 and 8.0, which anyone sensible gave up on a while ago. I'm all for > dropping those older ones, but I don't think getting more aggressive than > that and bundling 8.1 in while you're at it is so wise. I think 8.2 is the first release with a vacuum that doesn't completely thrash your i/o. Also the first one where you could effectively use partitioning because you could actually add and drop partitions. Also the first one with concurrent index builds. I can't imagine supporting recommending 8.1 for anything but a toy deployment today. I still insist it's unrealistic to consider any of these, even 8.2, as anything but "best effort" at this point. Declaring 8.0 "end of life" today is implying that we haven't already been skipping fixing bugs in it that would have required major changes. People running 8.1 and 8.2 should be given the truth that only really important bugs are going to cause any significant development for these versions. Otherwise they're only going to get fixes that are simple and small enough that the patches from later versions apply cleanly without major code changes. This isn't out of laziness, it's because we know there are existing installations depending on these releases and we don't want to risk breaking them with major chunks of new code or fixing bugs some people could be relying on unwittingly. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
