Обсуждение: Stable Release?
Dear Admins, A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the latest stable release? I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier releases. Can anyone comment? Carol
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:53:35AM -0500, Carol Walter wrote: > Dear Admins, > > A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the lateststable release? > I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier releases. Can anyone comment? Have you tried to check out the website of the project? Let me help you, it's http://www.postgresql.org/ I'm sure you've read it, while you was looking for this list... Sincerely, Gergely Czuczy, Harmless Digital mailto: gergely.czuczy@harmless.hu -- Legacy software is software that works.
Вложения
Carol Walter wrote: > A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is > 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the latest stable release? I > thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier releases. Can > anyone comment? The sole reason we released 8.2.6 and 8.1.11 was to fix bugs found in 8.2.5 and 8.1.10, which had fixes for bugs in the earlier releases, and so on. If you are not on one of the latest releases, you are running a version with known bugs. 8.1.6 in particular fixed a nasty autovac bug, which is not present on any 8.2. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:53:35 -0500 Carol Walter <walterc@indiana.edu> wrote: > Dear Admins, > > A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is > 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the latest stable release? > I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier > releases. Can anyone comment? Sure: http://www.postgresql.org/ 8.3.0 is current stable release. 8.2.6 is current 8.2 stable release. 8.1.11 is current 8.1 stable release. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHva+BATb/zqfZUUQRArGdAKCKng1Vg/8wdG4e+f26QPbf9yV5ZgCggs5i G48y2hPLEoTNAPm17HDv4Bw= =Zf1r -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Gergely CZUCZY wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:53:35AM -0500, Carol Walter wrote: >> A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the lateststable release? >> I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier releases. Can anyone comment? > Have you tried to check out the website of the project? > Let me help you, it's http://www.postgresql.org/ > I'm sure you've read it, while you was looking for this list... > I'm guessing Carol did see it but still has confusion over whether a "major" or "latest" release is considered "stable". I see the web site mention that 8.3's the "latest" release; and on other pages it says 8.2.3 is the latest release[1], and sometimes other versions[2]. With all the bizarre numbering schemes software[3] uses, where sometimes 2.0.0 means "unstable"; perhaps it'd be nice if our versioning page[4] explicitly said "Our major releases are stable releases that we consider suitable for production". [1] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_chinese_trad.html [2] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_czech.html#item1.6 [3] http://www.linux.com/feature/45507 [4] http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Carol Walter <walterc@indiana.edu> wrote:
>> A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL is
>> 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the latest stable release?
>> I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier
>> releases. Can anyone comment?
> Sure:
> 8.3.0 is current stable release.
> 8.2.6 is current 8.2 stable release.
> 8.1.11 is current 8.1 stable release.
I wouldn't argue with a DBA who takes the position that a new major
PG branch isn't "stable" enough for him/her until it's reached the
.1 or .2 or so minor release --- that's just saying that you don't
want to be a pioneer. But once a branch is past that point, it's
probably at least as stable as older branches. If you look at the
patch history, an awful lot of bugs go back more than one branch,
and there are known issues in old branches that never will be fixed.
By now I would certainly consider 8.2.latest as the most stable
available release.
The correct term for 8.1 and before is not "stable" but "obsolete".
The only reason we continue to support them is for the convenience
of people who have databases too big for annual dump/reload exercises
and/or don't want to re-test their applications that often.
regards, tom lane
I appreciate all your comments. I knew I'd be opening a kettle of fish with the question. I have been all over the postgres site but I didn't feel I got a straight -forward answer to my question. When I had read the docs and still didn't know the answer, I went to you guys for a definitive answer. Let me tell you why I want to know. The colleague I mentioned in my previous message is our Unix System Admin. He just built a new web-server. Our web is dependent on postgres for all it's database work. We may have a strange division of labor here. The sys admin makes the packages. I usually add them, but I don't support our web server. The Unix Admin told me that he was going to put 8.1 on the new server, he is building because that's the latest stable version and besides he doesn't want to build a new postgres package there. All of my machines that are running postgres have 8.2.4. I understood this to be a stable release and I've had no trouble with it. I was taken aback by this other information that my colleague had given me, hence the reason for my question. Carol On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Ron Mayer wrote: > Gergely CZUCZY wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:53:35AM -0500, Carol Walter wrote: >>> A colleague told me that the latest stable release of PostgreSQL >>> is 8.1.x. I thought it was 8.2.4. What is the latest stable >>> release? >>> I thought there was a problem with autovacuum in the earlier >>> releases. Can anyone comment? >> Have you tried to check out the website of the project? >> Let me help you, it's http://www.postgresql.org/ >> I'm sure you've read it, while you was looking for this list... >> > > I'm guessing Carol did see it but still has confusion over > whether a "major" or "latest" release is considered "stable". > > I see the web site mention that 8.3's the "latest" release; > and on other pages it says 8.2.3 is the latest release[1], and > sometimes other versions[2]. > > With all the bizarre numbering schemes software[3] uses, > where sometimes 2.0.0 means "unstable"; perhaps it'd be > nice if our versioning page[4] explicitly said "Our major > releases are stable releases that we consider suitable for > production". > > > > > > [1] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_chinese_trad.html > [2] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_czech.html#item1.6 > [3] http://www.linux.com/feature/45507 > [4] http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Carol Walter <walterc@indiana.edu> wrote: > them, but I don't support our web server. The Unix Admin told me > that he was going to put 8.1 on the new server, he is building > because that's the latest stable version and besides he doesn't want > to build a new postgres package there. His laziness aside (the good kind) not wanting to build a package is kind of a poor excuse. If you're running RHEL or Fedora, the PGDG rpms should work fine. If you're running debian or ubuntu, then 8.2 is available for most of those versions. 8.2 is MUCH better than 8.1. It has a couple of features that make it much nicer than 8.1 in production. > All of my machines that are > running postgres have 8.2.4. If you need to move data from there to production you're going to have issues getting it from 8.2 and into 8.1. It is NOT your Unix SA's job to decide which version of postgresql to support, it is you, the DBA who should be deciding that. He should be supporting you in that choice. > I understood this to be a stable > release and I've had no trouble with it. I was taken aback by this > other information that my colleague had given me, hence the reason > for my question. I don't think he has any evidence to back up his claim. also, 8.2.4 is not the latest stable, 8.2.6 is. It's a good idea to keep up with patch releases in pgsql.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:13:09 -0500 Carol Walter <walterc@indiana.edu> wrote: > The Unix Admin told me > that he was going to put 8.1 on the new server, he is building > because that's the latest stable version and besides he doesn't want > to build a new postgres package there. All of my machines that are > running postgres have 8.2.4. I understood this to be a stable > release and I've had no trouble with it. I was taken aback by this > other information that my colleague had given me, hence the reason > for my question. Thanks for your explanation. For your own digestion :) 8.3.0 is the latest current stable release from postgresql.org. However it *is* brand new. For your purposes it may make sense to stick with a slightly older but still stable release of 8.2.6 or 8.1.11. If your sysadmin has a problem with this, feel free to point him to us. I am sure there are plenty of people on the list that would be willing to set him straight. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drkae - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHvezIATb/zqfZUUQRAlHoAJ9r4te9zDXbcHuGCOtRMdShbmrfegCdHvLe Lm2mqOFRV+qnRRM1d4m50VQ= =0n6R -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
FYI, We're on Solaris 10.
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Scott Marlowe" <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>Date: February 21, 2008 4:21:24 PM ESTTo: "Carol Walter" <walterc@indiana.edu>Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Stable Release?On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Carol Walter <walterc@indiana.edu> wrote:them, but I don't support our web server. The Unix Admin told methat he was going to put 8.1 on the new server, he is buildingbecause that's the latest stable version and besides he doesn't wantto build a new postgres package there.His laziness aside (the good kind) not wanting to build a package iskind of a poor excuse. If you're running RHEL or Fedora, the PGDGrpms should work fine. If you're running debian or ubuntu, then 8.2is available for most of those versions. 8.2 is MUCH better than 8.1.It has a couple of features that make it much nicer than 8.1 inproduction.All of my machines that arerunning postgres have 8.2.4.If you need to move data from there to production you're going to haveissues getting it from 8.2 and into 8.1. It is NOT your Unix SA's jobto decide which version of postgresql to support, it is you, the DBAwho should be deciding that. He should be supporting you in thatchoice.I understood this to be a stablerelease and I've had no trouble with it. I was taken aback by thisother information that my colleague had given me, hence the reasonfor my question.I don't think he has any evidence to back up his claim. also, 8.2.4is not the latest stable, 8.2.6 is. It's a good idea to keep up withpatch releases in pgsql.---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?