Обсуждение: Using Different Ports for Multiple PosgreSQL Installations: Any Issues?

I'm investigating various methods for long-term upgrade capability of
my current PG setup and I want to assign an unused port to each
upgrade--such port being unique while the version exists on my system.

Has anyone found such a use causing any problems?

Thanks.

Best regards,

-Tom

I run multiple instances of postgres on unix sockets without any
problems. Do you have to use a port? If not, just use the sockets.

Cheers
Ye

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm investigating various methods for long-term upgrade capability of
> my current PG setup and I want to assign an unused port to each
> upgrade--such port being unique while the version exists on my system.
>
> Has anyone found such a use causing any problems?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -Tom
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ye Chuah <yechuah@gmail.com> wrote:
> I run multiple instances of postgres on unix sockets without any
> problems. Do you have to use a port? If not, just use the sockets.

Hm, I need remote access so I think I have to use a port, correct?

And really, I won't be using more than one instance except for a short
while during the upgrade of the data.

Thanks, Ye.

-Tom

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 08:56:24AM -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ye Chuah <yechuah@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I run multiple instances of postgres on unix sockets without any
> > problems. Do you have to use a port? If not, just use the sockets.
>
> Hm, I need remote access so I think I have to use a port, correct?
>
> And really, I won't be using more than one instance except for a short
> while during the upgrade of the data.

FYI, the postgresql.conf port setting actually controls the TCP port and
is embedded in the unix domain socket name, so port really controls
both.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 08:56:24AM -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Ye Chuah <yechuah@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I run multiple instances of postgres on unix sockets without any
>> > problems. Do you have to use a port? If not, just use the sockets.
>>
>> Hm, I need remote access so I think I have to use a port, correct?
...
> FYI, the postgresql.conf port setting actually controls the TCP port and
> is embedded in the unix domain socket name, so port really controls
> both.

Thanks, Bruce.

Best,

-Tom

On 2 October 2012 09:00, Tom Browder <tom.browder@gmail.com> wrote:
>> FYI, the postgresql.conf port setting actually controls the TCP port and
>> is embedded in the unix domain socket name, so port really controls
>> both.

> Thanks, Bruce.

As an aside: this is exactly the way postgres package maintainers for Debian/
*buntu tackle the issue of data migrations.  Two versions running in
parallel on
different ports.


Cheers,
Andrej