←back to thread

264 points davidgomes | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.402s | source
Show context
elric ◴[] No.41876822[source]
Lots of dogmatism in this discussion, it seems. A couple of things:

1. Most psql deployments are not exposed to the interwebz, they are typically only accessible to the applications that need them by virtue of network setup (firewalls etc). This limits the attack vector to whatever the application does. Good.

2. Distro vendors (RHEL et al) often stick to major psql release for the lifecycle of the OS version. If the OS lives longer than the psql major version, they take on the responsability of backporting critical security issues.

3. While upgrades aren't hard, they're not easy either.

4. Psql is pretty much feature complete for many workloads, and pretty stable in general. For many people, there is little need to chase the latest major version.

replies(7): >>41876901 #>>41877104 #>>41877174 #>>41877411 #>>41877438 #>>41878003 #>>41879089 #
1. KaiserPro ◴[] No.41878003[source]
Upgrading a datastore is a massive, massive risk.

It requires a lot of work, planned downtime, or some way to smear updates across the estate.

The cost of any failure is very high. The benefit of any major upgrade is also vanishingly small. Unless you need a specific feature, its just not worth it.

replies(1): >>41879720 #
2. ttfkam ◴[] No.41879720[source]
Or when the version is EOL, not getting security patches, and/or only compatible with an OS that isn't getting security updates.

…or you're on AWS RDS, which will automatically bump your db cluster if it goes EOL and you ignore the notices for more than a year.