Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-09 Thread Sumeet Jauhar
Thank you . Scott and Brad . Valuable information for sure . I plan to browse through the documentation for Postgres 9 and identify all the potential advantages that it will bring to our application . As rightly pointed out 8.2 may be on the path to obsolescence . On Friday, August 5, 2011, Scott

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-09 Thread Sumeet Jauhar
Yes the very fact that we are using a very very old version of Postgres is certainly causing alot of problems . On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Sumeet Jauhar > wrote: > > > > > > Our application is running on Postgres 7.4.X . I agree that th

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-08 Thread Greg Smith
Sumeet Jauhar wrote: Our application is running on Postgres 7.4.X . I agree that this is a very old version of Postgres and we should have upgraded . It's important to know the .X here. The latest 7.4 is 7.4.30: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/release.html If you're running a

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Tom Lane
Scott Marlowe writes: > I would upgrade to either 8.2 or 9.0 and here's my reasons. with 8.2 > you still have implicit casts, which your application may depend upon. > Most other changes between 7.4 and 8.2 were pretty small, so if > you've got a lot of implicit casts in your SQL, 8.2 will be th

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > then you should really do so.  The changes to things like autovacuum > getting multi-threaded (8.3) HOT updates (8.3) on disk tracking of Wait, multithreaded autovac may have been put in place in 8.2 . Anyway, my points still stand, just migh

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Sumeet Jauhar wrote: > >    [ Sumeet ] ok so i agree we need to move ahead and shift to a higher > version . But how do we decide that . Which one would you say is the > stablest version of Postgres [ still supported version ] out in the market > below beacuse Brad

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)
nce@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption > > > We also ran 7.4 for quite a while (on reliable hardware), and never had > any corruption problems except for some index corruption issues - but > that bug was pretty obscure and was fixed in 7.4 By the

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)
> -Original Message- > From: pgsql-performance-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-performance- > ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Scott Marlowe > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:22 PM > To: Sumeet Jauhar > Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PERFOR

Re: [PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Scott Marlowe
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Sumeet Jauhar wrote: > > > Our application is running on Postgres 7.4.X . I agree that this is a very > old version of Postgres and we should have upgraded . The issue that we > faced is that Wow, that is a very old version. It has been out of maintenance for a lo

[PERFORM] Suspected Postgres Datacorruption

2011-08-04 Thread Sumeet Jauhar
Hi All , Can you please help me out with the following questions . Our application is running on Postgres 7.4.X . I agree that this is a very old version of Postgres and we should have upgraded . The issue that we faced is that 1 . There was a system crash due to a hardware failure . 2 .