From: | Justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: postgre vs MySQL |
Date: | 2008-03-12 05:09:25 |
Message-ID: | 47D76585.8010701@emproshunts.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
i've had to many sleepless nights rolling back patches on other software
to just roll out patches.
I'm a wait and see guy on most things. If its security update and the
server is exposed to the internet i dig into that right away.
Now if patch fixes a problem about data integrity i also dig into the
detail to see if it affects my install if not i'll skip it.
this is just my personal experience with patches for other software.
Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I view updates/patches of any kind like this, if ain't broke don't fix it.
>> I normally only update computers with security patches only after i prove it
>> don't destroy installs.
>>
>
> But that's juast it. When a postgresql update comes out, it is
> precisely because the database IS broken. A bug that might eat your
> data or allow an attacker to get into your database are the kinds of
> fixes, and the only kind really, that go into production pgsql
> releases. I too wait a day or two to test it on a staging server, but
> I've never had a pgsql update blow back in my face, and I've done an
> awful lot of them.
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kakoli Sen | 2008-03-12 05:13:01 | Problem with starting PostgreSQL server 7.4.19 |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-03-12 03:11:32 | Re: postgre vs MySQL |