| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ekaterina Amez <ekaterina(dot)amez(at)zunibal(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Should I care about this error "failed to link /usr/bin/psql [...] exists and it is not a symlink"? |
| Date: | 2019-12-04 13:39:05 |
| Message-ID: | 14287.1575466745@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Ekaterina Amez <ekaterina(dot)amez(at)zunibal(dot)com> writes:
> When you say "Red Hat's postgres packages use a much different file
> layout than the PGDG packages, so they don't interoperate terribly
> well.", I guess you're talking about the installation, not the structure
> of the database. If I'm right, there shouldn't be problems with
> pg_upgrade (I'm worried about data corruption as I'm not sure how to
> detect it).
Right, I'm just talking about where they put the installed executables
and libraries. The database data per se should be compatible.
> Would it be possible to install another server with same CentOS but with
> PGDG packages of postgres 9.2 and create the replica to this server and
> replaces this one with main server when both are completely synchronized?
Should work, I think, and that's probably a good idea. PGDG's file layout
supports having both 9.2 and 9.6 installed on the same machine much better
than Red Hat's does.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Hughes | 2019-12-04 14:33:50 | tcp_keepalives settings not being set |
| Previous Message | soumik.bhattacharjee | 2019-12-04 13:34:02 | Postgres and Java Microservices Multithreading |