fbpx
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: OT: @Johan or Rene: PG

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 22 hours ago #1

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the answer: they use, what the debian guys include in their stable builds - and that seems still to be this heavily outdated version.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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 21 hours ago #2

  • wriedmann
  • wriedmann's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 1404
  • Karma: 6
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
Wolfgang Riedmann
Meran, South Tyrol, Italy
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
www.riedmann.it - docs.xsharp.it

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

Last edit: by wriedmann.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 18 hours ago #3

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

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

Last edit: by FFF. Reason: typo

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 18 hours ago #4

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the answer: they use, what the debian guys include in their stable builds - and that seems still to be this heavily outdated version.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I am as outdated as they are, newest 9.4, although I run on my desktop 8.4, 9.1,9.2,9.3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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 17 hours ago #5

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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 15 hours ago #6

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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 14 hours ago #7

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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 14 hours ago #8

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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 14 hours ago #9

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.

OT: @Johan or Rene: PG 8 months 14 hours ago #10

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

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

Last edit: by rjpajaron.
  • Page:
  • 1