| From: | Richard Broersma <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reliability of Windows versions 8.3 or 8.4 |
| Date: | 2010-05-12 18:02:37 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTilO6zjXl4TLUMEjYdG4LmwqLq6Q0I9dqbsTDC9x@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> Richard Broersma wrote on 12.05.2010 17:45:
>
>> I'm considering using the windows version PostgreSQL in the following
>> conditions:
>> at least 10 years of up time (with periodic power failures<= 1 a year)
>
> I don't think you can get 10 years of up time on a Windows Server.
>
> Most of the security patches will need a reboot, and that means probably one
> reboot every month.
:) Hopefully this isn't the real reason for the catastrophe in the
Gulf of Mexico.
Actually my observation with several clients in the industry that I
work, I've noticed that systems like this never get patches applied.
If the system breaks or is known to be unreliable, then the whole
system is replaced.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2010-05-12 18:05:58 | pg_dump custom format across versions |
| Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2010-05-12 17:55:49 | Re: Reliability of Windows versions 8.3 or 8.4 |