Re: linux standard layout

Thanks all.

I cannot change the decision on vmware or layout, but it's great to know
that the rpm way is a valid one.

I appreciate all inputs.



Regards,

Ben Kim


On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Scott Marlowe wrote:

> 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.
>