> The entire field of maintenance engineering would like a word. Over longer periods of time it's vastly cheaper to regularly fix things even before they break,

> The entire field of maintenance engineering would like a word. Over longer periods of time it's vastly cheaper to regularly fix things even before they break, and software is no exception. and > Not maintaining your systems is only cheaper in the long run if you don't count the engineering time required to fix things when they break or need to be replaced. Ounce of prevention vs pound of cure and all that. Those are pithy assertions, but I don't think they're universally factually correct. This applies at some scales, but not at others. One size does not fit all, nor does one maintenance strategy fit all. I do believe I specifically called out the dogmatism in this discussion, and yet here we go piling on more of the same. I don't think that's terribly helpful. I assume that everyone is well aware of all the points you raised, as I suspect that most people running PostgreSQL are not in fact incompetent. Not everyone has a team which "is in control of its systems", nor can everyone afford such a team. It may well be cheaper for some people to run something old until it burns only to have The Database Consultant come in one day to raise it from the dead.