From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Lamar Owen" <lowen(at)pari(dot)edu>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Old binary packages. |
Date: | 2004-01-20 08:06:22 |
Message-ID: | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8720526@mail.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
> Sent: 20 January 2004 00:21
> To: Lamar Owen; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Old binary packages.
>
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > I am looking at the possibility of cleaning up the binary
> tree on the
> > ftp site, and was wondering what the group thought about
> purging old
> > binaries. What I was thinking would be to remove all but the last
> > minor release of each major version. Thus, I would remove 7.4, but
> > leave 7.4.1. The space taken by binaries is significant
> (about 1GB at
> > this point). Since we are keeping all source releases (although I
> > would question that, since we use CVS), keeping all the binaries
> > around is just a space waster, IMHO.
>
> Unless you know that someone is actually running out of
> space, I think it would be better to keep past releases
> around. I've needed them more often than you would think.
On that note, new mirror providers often comment on how small our ftp
area is compared to most others. I've *never* heard a complaint about
the size.
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-01-20 08:20:18 | Re: Old binary packages. |
Previous Message | Brian Moore | 2004-01-20 06:33:42 | Allow backend to output result sets in XML |