Hello,
Version 7.5 is as close to a major release as I have seen in the almost 9 years I have been using PostgreSQL.
This release brings about a lot of "enterprise" features that have been holding back PostgreSQL in a big way for
for a long time.
All of my serious customers; potential, existing and past has all at one point or another requested most if not
all of the features being released onto the world with 7.5. In fact the only ones that I can think of off the top
of my head that isn't in the current list of availables is table partitioning and to a lesser extent two phase commit.
This release definately deserves a major version jump. If it were up to me it would be more than one (I would
call it 10h for obvious reasons. O.k. the h is a joke but I am serious about the 10) just from a marketing
standpoint. I could argue a major version jump just from the fact that we finally have a port to the most used
operating system (regardless if that is good or bad) in the world.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
They have tried to do the same for "With Naked Gun" (I think it is called in English). They called the second film "With Naked Gun 2 1/2". The third version was called "33 1/3" then ...
Maybe the tenth film would be 10^256 then ...
8.0 would be ok but I am pretty against jumping version number - they have such a pure marketing flavour ("we have a high version number but we don't know what else we should tell you about the new release"). Database work should be "conservative" which means slowly but surely ... - from my point of view this conflicts with pumping version numbers. I don't think there will be one more user just because of a different version number.
Maybe a hostily overtake of Oracle (not Firebird as mentioned by Peter) would justify 10.0.0 ;).
Regards,
Hans
-- Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria Tel: +43/720/10 1234567 or +43/664/816 40 77 www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
