Re: A quick question on CONTRIB package - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ramakrishna Reddy
Subject Re: A quick question on CONTRIB package
Date
Msg-id CA5E157F5EFE1C4D9CCC5272E67F8781084AB6@rsi-che-mail01.induschennai.rsystems.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to A quick question on CONTRIB package  ("Ramakrishna Reddy" <ramakrishna.reddy@indussoft.com>)
Responses Re: A quick question on CONTRIB package
List pgsql-general
Hi,

Thanks for your vauable suggestions.

We have very huge databases in many installations and infact have plans for upgrading to latest releases. But as we are
notvery sure about the stability of post 7.2.1 versions, refrained from doing that. Could you please suggest me which
versionis the best in terms of stability, performance and minimal bugs. We want to upgrade this on both our Windows as
wellas Linux environments. 


Thanks again,
RamaKrishna.

________________________________

From: Scott Marlowe [mailto:smarlowe@g2switchworks.com]
Sent: Wed 5/31/2006 11:05 PM
To: Ramakrishna Reddy
Cc: pgsql general
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] A quick question on CONTRIB package



On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 06:47, Ramakrishna Reddy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to connect to remote databases using Dblink. Our existing version is 7.2.1 on Windows and please point me the
locationof this package where I can download from and the installation procedure. 

You should REALLY REALLY REALLY consider upgrading to at least version
8.0.8, if not 8.1.4.

7.2 is, in general not supported.  The windows port, in particular, has
no support whatsoever.  It has known data eating bugs and the dreaded
transaction wraparound bug in particular.

Also, by updating to 8.0.8 or 8.1.4 you should get the dblink package as
a matter of course, I believe.  A windows user would have to confirm
that for me though.  But seriously, if you value your data, updated from
7.2.1 as soon as humanly possible



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: A quick question on CONTRIB package
Next
From: Chris Browne
Date:
Subject: Re: SCSI disk: still the way to go?