Re: PostgreSQL-9.0.1

Hi Tom,

The "ldconfig" magic worked !!!!!

I included "/usr/local/lib" in "/etc/ld.so.conf" and fired "ldconfig".

It worked. I installed PostgreSQL with zlib option.

Thanks a ton for your reply !

One request -

We only use community version of PostgreSQL. We need to standardize the
installation procedure for our production boxes.

Could you please let us know what other precautions are to be taken to get
the PostgreSQL setup smooth.

As mentioned in my previous email, we never faced this problem before.

Note : We use RHEL or CentOS (32 and 64 bit).

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Venkat Balaji <venkat(dot)balaji(at)verse(dot)in>wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> Thank you very much for your reply !
>
> Before I read this post, I had successfully installed Postgres with
> "--without-zlib" option.
>
> Could you please let me know what could be the impact on the database and
> application performance ?
>
> I am installing PG on a brand new server (CentOS - 5.4) 32 bit. I would
> redo the installation with "ldconfig" option as well (i never did before).
>
> But, we did not face this problem before on any of our servers (both on 64
> bit and 32 bit). I mean we never had to manually link our libraries using
> "ldconfig".
>
>
> Thanks
> Venkat
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Venkat Balaji <venkat(dot)balaji(at)verse(dot)in> writes:
>> > I believe, there must be some options to be used with make.
>>
>> No, the make command should just be "make". Any options that are needed
>> would be supplied at the configure step.
>>
>> > pg_backup_archiver.o: In function `SetOutput':
>> > pg_backup_archiver.c:(.text+0x2b6f): undefined reference to `gzopen64'
>>
>> FWIW, this seems to indicate a mismatch between the zlib.h you're using
>> and the libz.so you're linking to. The PG sources do not reference
>> gzopen64, but some versions of zlib.h conditionally #define gzopen as
>> gzopen64 --- in which case it'd better be used with a library that
>> actually provides that symbol. Evidently the one that the linker is
>> finding does not. If I had to bet based on this much information,
>> I'd bet on a manual zlib installation that doesn't match the system's
>> libz.so, and for which you forgot to do the ldconfig magic needed to get
>> the linker to actually pick yours instead of the /usr/lib one.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>>
>
>