Hi,
On Mon, 2017-12-25 at 16:39 +0200, Benyamin Guedj wrote:
> Is working with the default distribution’s version (9.2) really the “best
> practice”, even though it is no longer supported?
Red Hat / CentOS also provides PostgreSQL 9.6 (and 9.5, IIRC), via SCL. I mean,
those versions are also "su
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Jaime Casanova <
jaime.casan...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 25 December 2017 at 09:39, Benyamin Guedj
> wrote:
> >
> > Upon doing so, our DevOps team in response insisted (and still insists)
> that
> > we keep using version 9.2 as it is part of the Centos 7 distr
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 06:48:09PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
>> so you have two options:
>>
>> 1) use the packages from yum.postgresql.org for a supported version
>> 2) get commercial support for your out-of-community-support verssion
>>
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 06:48:09PM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> so you have two options:
>
> 1) use the packages from yum.postgresql.org for a supported version
> 2) get commercial support for your out-of-community-support verssion
>
> but even if you do 2, that would be a preparatory step loo
On 25 December 2017 at 09:39, Benyamin Guedj wrote:
>
> Upon doing so, our DevOps team in response insisted (and still insists) that
> we keep using version 9.2 as it is part of the Centos 7 distribution, and
> they believe that version to be “best practice”, even though PostgreSQL 9.2
> is no lon
