[arch-general] postgresql 9.3 -> 9.4

Don deJuan donjuansjiz at gmail.com
Thu Jan 29 18:17:15 UTC 2015

On 01/29/2015 10:01 AM, Georg Altmann wrote:
> On 29.01.2015 17:40, Don deJuan wrote:
> > From someone who runs Arch in prod on a ton of servers. It was the
> >  admins fault. Not arch's not pacman's and not PGSQL's it was the
> > admin.
> > Running a rolling release in prod requires the ability to pay
> > attention to every detail fully for every action you make.
> > Be accountable for your own mistake. This thread is a joke at this
> >  point. The OP messed up by nothing other than his own lack of
> > admining a prod box productively and effectively. This situation
> > would have been avoided if you were on top of your prod box and
> > not just blindly running pacman -Syu. And yes I actually had 0
> > issues with this update cause I saw it in the queue to install and
> > took the needed steps to avoid the OP's exact situation. Have a
> > screwed up on one of these sure and was never anything more than my
> > own mistake. Whatever happened to self accountability? Know the
> > software you run, dont let the software run you.
> Look, I don't see what you are getting at here. I am not blaming
> anyone for anything. I am _not_ running anything like a production
> environment. Again, this is my personal desktop computer. I cannot
> spent much time for every update that shows up. And, as I said before,

That is the key sentence right there "cannot spent much time for every
update" Sounds like Arch is not the most ideal Linux OS for your use
case. Arch requires the time and effort personal box or not.

And how many home users/admins who have it prod did not have this issue
cause they spent the time that IS required to admin an arch install

> we live in a world where remote security flaws appear almost daily and
> thus, as a responsible person, you have to update often. It would be
> nice if the packaging system would support me doing this and not "run
> me" as it did in this special case.
> I am merely _suggesting_ to implement a warning message.
> It certainly _is_ easy to miss something in the "pacman -Suy" output.
> As such, I think this would be beneficial to everybody running
> postgresql, be it on a single desktop computer or a farm of servers.
> Regards,
> Georg

More information about the arch-general mailing list