Re: Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases

From: Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
To: Joshua D(dot) Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, CAJ CAJ <pguser(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases
Date: 2007-03-15 19:00:17
Message-ID: 9A8BAE79-DCB9-4BAC-AA1C-38151DB37E39@myemma.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mar 15, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>
>>
>> Your other four points are mere rehashings of that one.
>
> Yes. All of my points directly revolve around the reality that 8.2
> is a
> short cycle release and that 8.3 is a long cycle release. Further that
> due to 8.2 being a short cycle release, it will not see as much
> production action as 8.3 (and definitely not 8.1 per the current
> enterprise releases).
>
> That to me is an extremely valid point, and a point that my customers
> have made *to me*.
>
> Example discussion with customer:
>
> Customer: CMD, should we update to 8.2.3
> CMD: Is there something in 8.2.3 that will benefit you?
> Customer: We don't know
> CMD: Are you having problems with 8.1? (We try to push all
> customers to
> at least 8.1)
> Customer: No, it is just that 8.2 is the current release
> CMD: True, but 8.3 is due out in the summer and 8.3 is a standard
> cycle
> release
> Customer: Oh... o.k. let's wait.
> CMD: I think that is probably prudent.
>
>
> I am not just coming up with this stuff to be difficult. This is real
> world here. Couple the above, with my previous post and *unless* there
> is something that 8.2 gives you explicitly (and there are reasons to
> upgrade to 8.2), there *may* (note word *may*) not be a reason to
> upgrade.
>
> Take that and add, that 8.3 is just around the corner and my argument
> stands.
>
> The only argument anyone that I see against the above is the, "upgrade
> because it is shiny argument". Which indeed may (there is that word
> again) be enough. In business, shiny can be bad.
>
> What I see in this thread, is people saying 8.2.3 is the cat's meow,
> which of course is true. That doesn't mean that you need to upgrade.
>
> I have a 8 year old Saab 9-5 V6 Turbo. It has leather, heated and air
> conditioned seats. True, it is 8 years old, but it only has 62k on it.
> The new model, offers some better styling, a 4 cylinder with more
> horsepower and the paint reflects light just a little better.
>
> Does that mean I want to take my debt free car, and trade it in for a
> new 40k loan? Not on your life, my 8 year old Saab has at least 2 more
> years in it and I was smart and bought an extended warranty.
>
> Why is it, that every time someone suggests that someone may not
> need to
> upgrade to the latest and greatest paint job, social networking
> site or
> piece of software that people get upset?

Are you saying you don't have a MySpace account :)?

erik jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
sofware developer
615-296-0838
emma(r)

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ken Johanson 2007-03-15 19:39:13 Re: Native type for storing fractions (e.g 1/3)?
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-03-15 18:55:10 Re: Lifecycle of PostgreSQL releases