7.4?
Do you guys have any tentative estimates about when 7.4 is going to get released?
What is the timeframe? Also, what is going to be there that is not in 7.3?
I am currently on 7.2, and trying to find out whether it makes sense to upgrade to 7.3 now or to wait for 7.4 and go right there...
Thanks!
Dima
Dmitry Tkach <dmitry@openratings.com> writes:
I am currently on 7.2, and trying to find out whether it makes sense to upgrade to 7.3 now or to wait for 7.4 and go right there...
And when 7.4 is out, won't you be wondering whether to wait for 7.5?
I'd say update when the current version seems worth the effort of
updating to you. Don't think about the future, or you'll be chasing
mirages forever.
Anyway, to answer your question: the current timeframe for 7.4 beta is
April-ish. Sometime after that it will go final. Sometime after
*that*, a prudent DBA might think about migrating to it. How long do
you want to wait?
regards, tom lane
How about auto-vacuum....
Robert Treat wrote:
Show quoted text
On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 14:29, Ericson Smith wrote:
Could someone summarize what would be the 3 changes that would have the
most impact in 7.4?Impact to who? :-)
1. Native Windows Support
2. Point In Time Recovery
3. Standard Replication Solution(Please note that while these are all currently planned for 7.4, and are
actively being developed, I can't guarantee they will all be there.)Robert Treat
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 04:12:41PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
April-ish. Sometime after that it will go final. Sometime after
*that*, a prudent DBA might think about migrating to it. How long do
This is a good point: 7.3 (i.e. with no dot-release) was a bad bet
for production use, because of the numbers of changes in the system;
PITR alone will require enough changes that I wouldn't trust it for
production use immediately. Just because the software has been
released doesn't mean it's ready to put everywhere yet, especially
when you consider that dropping back a version is not something
really contemplated by the current upgrade path.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110How about a feature as in Informix where you could specify a database_id
where then
thru a realm.conf file you map that id to a hostname:databasename
then saying
database.schema.table mapps to hostname.database.schema.table
This way the applications can do a bit HA or distributed DB...
Neil Conway wrote:
Show quoted text
On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 22:44, Ed L. wrote:
And do I understand correctly the replication to be eventually
included will be an embedded syncronous replication solution based on
Postgres-R and the Spread GCS?No, I don't think that's set in stone (although I can't speak for the
core team). While I think Postgres-R is promising, there might be room
for additional replication implementations that cater to different sets
of requirements.IMHO, eventually providing solutions for both synchronous and
asynchronous replication would be a good idea.Cheers,
Neil