fbpx

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG

More
6 months 3 days ago #1 by Karl Faller
OT: @Johan or Rene: PG was created by Karl Faller
Hi Johan/Rene!
Is one of you active on the PG mailing list? Up to now i don't have an account, so can't ask myself:
My provider serves on his shared hosts only PG 9.4 - i asked why, the answer: they use, what the debian guys include in their stable builds - and that seems still to be this heavily outdated version. Maybe, a hint might help ;)

TIA
Karl

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago - 6 months 3 days ago #2 by Wolfgang Riedmann
Replied by Wolfgang Riedmann on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
Hi Karl,

this is a Debian thing - I'm using this distribution on all of my Linux servers because it is rocksolid, and upgradeable in place for years....

In fact, Debian Jessie supports only PG 9.4:
packages.debian.org/de/jessie/postgresql

Debian Stretch, the most actual version, supports PG 9.6:
packages.debian.org/de/stretch/postgresql

Of course you can install a newer version on the server, but I would not do it as only the version delivered as system package will be updated when you install security updates.

Wolfgang
Last edit: 6 months 3 days ago by Wolfgang Riedmann.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago - 6 months 3 days ago #3 by Karl Faller
Replied by Karl Faller on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
Wolfgang,
i know. But in my case i can't install on the server, i have to use, what "they" provide. Given, that PG 11 is due the next 2 months, and PG 10 is in fact 10.4, i thought maybe the PG-side might push a bit...

Karl
Last edit: 6 months 3 days ago by Karl Faller. Reason: typo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #4 by Johan Nel
Replied by Johan Nel on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG

FFF wrote: Hi Johan/Rene!
Is one of you active on the PG mailing list?

Yes I am.

My provider serves on his shared hosts only PG 9.4 - i asked why, the answer: they use, what the debian guys include in their stable builds - and that seems still to be this heavily outdated version. Maybe, a hint might help ;)

I am as outdated as they are, newest 9.4, although I run on my desktop 8.4, 9.1,9.2,9.3
Not sure what you need from 10, as 9.4 serves more than what I require. Not using json yet, happy that I can do CTE and RETURNING. Out perform any database by a factor of 20 over a network.
HTH,

______________________
Johan Nel
George, South Africa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #5 by Karl Faller
Replied by Karl Faller on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
Johan,
me? Nothing, probably. As i wouldn't need most things after Vo 2.0 ;)
But 9.4 is from 2014, 9.6 from 9/2016, a ton of cool things in replication, security and parallel processing was introduced with 10, which is now already due to give way to 11. I simply think, given the reliability record of the PG-folks, it looks "bad" if debian keeps them back, that's all.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #6 by Rene J. Pajaron
Replied by Rene J. Pajaron on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
Hi Karl,

My experience with pg is with Windows OS (both desktop and server). We are using pg 10.4; and so far goes so well in-prem as well as cloud.

Microsoft Azure database instance for pg are at 10.3, 9.6, 9.5
More here: docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/postgresq...s-supported-versions

That will give you a hint stable build of pg. But so far, the following are the supported stable build;
10.4 · 2018-05-10
9.6.9 · 2018-05-10
9.5.13 · 2018-05-10
9.4.18 · 2018-05-10
9.3.23 · 2018-05-10

We will start evaluating pg 11 beta in coming weeks when we can spare some unused PC to use as test ground.

HTH

Rene

--

Rene Pajaron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 3 days ago #7 by Rene J. Pajaron
Replied by Rene J. Pajaron on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
PostgreSQL Global Development Group stated in their latest versioning system which can be illustrated in the following:

Previous versioning:
9.x.y where x is major upgrade of the main version 9; with y as minor upgrade over x.

Current versioning:
10.x is now equivalent to y; therefore, when it goes for x upgrade, they will add 1 to the main version number, in this case is 10+1 = 11

That is why today, we have 11 in beta. Using 9 versioning, it should be 10.1; the current release 10.4 should have been 10.0.4

Just a thought and my interpretation of the their new versioning system.

Maybe, people see pg is outdated due to a conservative approach to version numbers.

just a thought,

Rene

--

Rene Pajaron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 2 days ago #8 by Rene J. Pajaron
Replied by Rene J. Pajaron on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG

FFF wrote: Wolfgang,
i know. But in my case i can't install on the server, i have to use, what "they" provide. Given, that PG 11 is due the next 2 months, and PG 10 is in fact 10.4, i thought maybe the PG-side might push a bit...

Karl

I am thinking of using Linux on our next server: what do you think is most "user friendly": CentOS or Debian or Ubuntu? I considered myself a returning *nix user but that was 20+ years ago when I administered a Xenix (and Netware) servers with Win98 and NT4 in tow. On that Xenix, I administered a FoxBASE apps (not mine) and as a Clipper head at that time, I wonder if time goes back around maybe, I can give that a spin with Clipper for *nix.

Anyway, I am happy with Windows Server 2016, easy and "paid".


Regards,

Rene

--

Rene Pajaron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 2 days ago #9 by Rene J. Pajaron
Replied by Rene J. Pajaron on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG
Hi Johan,

10 included something that are very important to me and I even forget what it is.

More here: www.linuxjournal.com/content/postgresql-...rsion-great-database

Years ago, it was big issue in pg community when Uber replaces some portion of their database to MySQL from pg. It was discussed to deep that I can fall asleep reading it. The main point is the lack of logical replication pg on prior version and other "cooler" stuff

We are using streaming replication, but maybe someday, I will do some logical replication as well. Partitioning? I will find a way to appreciate that in the future. I am ready for testing 11 but for now, 10.4 is our main pg version.


Rene

--

Rene Pajaron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
6 months 2 days ago - 6 months 2 days ago #10 by Rene J. Pajaron
Replied by Rene J. Pajaron on topic OT: @Johan or Rene: PG

FFF wrote: Johan,
me? Nothing, probably. As i wouldn't need most things after Vo 2.0 ;)
But 9.4 is from 2014, 9.6 from 9/2016, a ton of cool things in replication, security and parallel processing was introduced with 10, which is now already due to give way to 11. I simply think, given the reliability record of the PG-folks, it looks "bad" if debian keeps them back, that's all.


As Wolfgang has stated, it is a Debian thing. Considering that distro was created by a OCD person Ian (RIP) whom added his former gf Debbie's name to it, they are as obsessed with stability that maybe I will like them for being like that. But pg 10 is really cool to missed.

--

Rene Pajaron
Last edit: 6 months 2 days ago by Rene J. Pajaron.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.