Re: Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases

Naz Gassiep <naz@mira.net> writes:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Example discussion with customer:
> ...
> Finally, in the absence of security concerns or performance issues (and
> I mean the "we can't afford to buy better hardware" type edge of the
> envelope type issues) there is zero *need* to upgrade.

This line of argument ignores the fact that newer versions often contain
fixes for data-loss-grade bugs.  Now admittedly that is usually an
argument for updating to x.y.z+1 rather than x.y+1, but I think it
destroys any reasoning on the basis of "if it ain't broke".

            regards, tom lane