From: | Rui DeSousa <rui(at)crazybean(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Pavan Kumar <pavan(dot)dba27(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>, Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: postgres source code installation vs rpm based installation |
Date: | 2019-06-05 14:47:58 |
Message-ID: | 1E7EF29F-3C87-4FC8-8A76-2E37E22C75E6@crazybean.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> On Jun 5, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Pavan Kumar <pavan(dot)dba27(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 1. Imagine a case where binaries got corrupted. what will happen to the database cluster?
> 2. One of the database had problem and need to apply bug fix patch at binaries. how do we handle this problem?
> 3. minor release
Custom builds sounds like the solution you need. I wouldn’t install the same version multiple times; however, having two different patch releases makes sense. For example, install one version of 10.1 and use it for multiple database clusters. Install version 10.2 in a different directory and update a given database cluster environment to use 10.2 binaries thus allowing for both 10.1 and 10.2 to be running on the same server.
I don’t think RPMs will allow you to run different patch releases.
P.s.
I have both 10.7 and 11.3 running on the same system without issue. Normally run one database cluster on the system; however, currently migrating between major versions and using the system for testing and migration efforts.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Kumar | 2019-06-05 14:48:18 | configure multiple repository path in pgbackrest |
Previous Message | Pavan Kumar | 2019-06-05 14:23:13 | Re: postgres source code installation vs rpm based installation |