Re: Partitions and work_mem?

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > On Oct 16, 2014 12:58 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> That is in fact exactly what people pay Red Hat to do, and it was my job
> >> to do it for Postgres when I worked there. I don't work there any more,
> >> but I'm sure my replacement is entirely capable of back-patching fixes
> as
> >> needed.
>
> > Do they backpatch everything, or just things like security issues? (in
> sure
> > they can do either, but do you know what the policy says?)
>
> Security issues are high priority to fix, otherwise it takes (usually)
> complaints from paying customers and/or effective lobbying from the
> package's maintainer. They have finite bandwidth for package updates,
> and they also take seriously the idea that a RHEL release series is
> supposed to be a stable platform. When I was there I was usually able
> to get them to update to new PG minor releases only when said releases
> involved security fixes, otherwise the can got kicked down the road...
>
> > Either way it does also mean that the support requests for such versions
> > would need to go to redhat rather than the community lists at some point
> -
> > right now their 8.4 would be almost the same as ours, but down the road
> > they'll start separating more and more of course.
>
> If you want a fix in Red Hat's version of 8.4, you need to be talking to
> them *now*, not "at some point". The community lost any input into that
> when we stopped updating 8.4.
>
> > For the op - of you haven't already, is suggest you take a look at
> > yum.postgresql.org which will get you a modern, supported, postgresql
> > version for rhel 6. Regardless of the support, you get all the other
> > improvements in postgresql.
>
> Yeah. Also, Red Hat is shipping a newer version (I think 9.2.something)
> as part of their "software collections" packaging initiative. I do not
> know whether that's included in a standard RHEL subscription or costs
> extra.
>

We've looked into both the repos at yum.postgresql.org and Red Hat's SCL,
but as most people are already aware, the problem is just that it takes a
LONG time to move a production system to a new version of a major
component, if it ever happens at all.

On a side note, the SCL stuff does require the right type of subsciption (
https://access.redhat.com/solutions/472793 ) and has a MUCH shorter life
cycle than the rest of RHEL (
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhscl ) so it's honestly
kind of hard to use in most production environments.