On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 at 13:40, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/24/25 15:37, David Rowley wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 at 04:51, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/24/25 08:00, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > I'd say it's exactly that attitude that causes people to think .0
> > should be avoided. Beta versions are meant for test instances. It'd be
> > good if people encouraged their use more often rather than pushing
> > people to defer til GA.
>
> 1) From previous posts to this list folks have mentioned their
> organizations prohibit touching anything less then a GA or maybe a late
> RC. That comes from on high and I doubt the folks issuing the orders are
> on this list.
That seems bizarre to me. If they want new releases of PostgreSQL to
be as stable as possible as early as possible, then beta and RC are
much better times to test than .0 is.
> 2) The attitude comes from lessons learned in the School of Hard Knocks.
> Until someone or someones can guarantee a new GA release will not eat
> your data or spring security leaks then the prudent thing to do is wait
> to see what happens when it hits the world at large. I learned this
> lesson, pitfalls of jumping into something new, across fields outside of
> software as well. In other words 'new and improved' is not always the
> case, see 737 MAX as case in point.
I don't see why this reason is applicable at all to my statement. I
didn't state that everyone should go and run with .0. I said we
shouldn't encourage people to test beta and RC versions, as if they
don't do that then .0 won't be as stable as if they did test (and
report issues). It seems like simple cause and effect to me.
> 3) Progress happens and you need to keep up. A little caution is good
> thing though, especially if you are the one who is being held
> responsible for any adverse outcomes.
We're talking test servers here. I assume they can be recreated
without too much trouble.
David
