Re: linux standard layout

A word of caution for packages/rpms.  Beware of admins who apply ALL updates that are available to a system.  I have
seenthis happen taking Postgres from say vresion 8.3.X to 8.4.X, which as you can imagine, caused problems. 


________________________________
From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org [pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Scott Marlowe
[scott.marlowe@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 11:48 PM
To: Ben Kim
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] linux standard layout

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Ben Kim <bkim@tamu.edu> wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> I have about 20 postgresql databases, about 3-4 GB in total.
>
> We are moving them from Solaris/SPARC to a linux based virtual machine.
>
> I don't like the VMWare environment, but it's not my choice, and assuming
> the cpu load is ok, will there be any benefits if I put each database on
> separate partitions, vs. simply using the one data directory?

What reasoning was given for putting your database server in a
virutalizeed environment?

> Also, how is using standard rpm, with its standard layout (/var/lib/pgsql,
> /usr/lib/pgsql, ...), generally regarded? ( vs. compiling everything ?) Does
> anyone think using the rpm is unprofessional or something that only
> beginners will do?
>
> I have someone who opposes the use of standard rpms (even yums) for this
> reason. I thought I'd check out how it is received professionally.

Sounds like a religious argument.  I mostly used packages, unless I
can't.  (i.e. two different versions on RH at the same time)

> I ask the question because sometimes I feel uneasy mixing rpms and source
> compilation.

Worry more about accidentally having two different versions of the
same lib linked to various executables.  It's easy to do with things
like mysql and apache and php and zlib.

> If I compile something from the source, sometimes I see a boundary condition
> - like, if I already have DBI from a standard rpm, it expects postgresql
> library at a certain location - making me wonder whether I should remove the
> DBI rpm and compile it also from the source, or whether I should use
> standard rpms for postgresql as well. (DBI may not be a good example.)
>
> In general I didn't have any problems yet with standard rpms and I can make
> the rpms work if there's a problem, but I may be missing something.

My advice:

put postgresql on its own, powerful, reliable non-virtualized server.
Demand that the person who wants to virtualize it justify their
decision with more than hand-wavy methodologies.  Use packages unless
you're on RPM and you need > 1 version of pgsql.  Even if you need to
compile some tarball against the packages, it's still easier to
maintain than to install it all from source.

--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin