Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around

> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com wrote:
>
>> > On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 18:04:42 -0500,
>> >>
>> >> Now, lets imagine PostgreSQL is being developed by a large company.
>> QA
>> >> announces it has found a bug that will cause all the users data to
>> >> disappear if they don't run a maintenence program correctly.
>> Vacuuming
>> >> one
>> >> or two tables is not enough, you have to vacuum all tables in all
>> >> databases.
>> >
>> > Except that Postgres isn't a large company and doing the work of
>> > back patching and testing old versions will be done instead of
>> > more important work.
>>
>> PostgreSQL is an open source project that plays with the big guys. Look
>> at
>> the Linux kernel. Imagine their file system guys thinking this way.
>> Linux
>> would still be Linus' hobbie.
>
> So, you are certain that every Linux file system bug has been patched all
> the way back to say kernel version 1.0 then? Do you have any evidence of
> this claim?

No one is suggesting back to version 1.0, but critical data loss bugs that
are present and relvent in used prior versions are fixed.

>
>> >> This bug would get marked as a critical error and a full scale effort
>> >> would be made to contact previous users to upgrade or check their
>> >> procedures.
>> >
>> > I don't think all commercial companies would do that. I doubt that
>> even
>> > most of them would.
>>
>> Database companies? You bet they would.
>
> Do you have any evidence or are you merely spouting an opinion as fact?
>
With Oracle and DB2, yes I have some personal experience.