| From: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
| Cc: | lsunley(at)mb(dot)sympatico(dot)ca, "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Russell Smith" <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around |
| Date: | 2005-02-20 13:10:20 |
| Message-ID: | 16641.24.91.171.78.1108905020.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 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.
>
>> 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.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2005-02-20 14:25:46 | Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-02-20 13:01:00 | Re: Data loss, vacuum, transaction wrap-around |