On 11/12/21 6:31 μ.μ., Michael Lewis wrote:
> Interesting. I'm not sure that moving an image for a VM with Postgres is compatible with the goal of minimizing
time/databut if upgrades are yearly or something, perhaps that is reasonable. It has
> been 9+ years since that post as well. But the full data will need to be included in the image if the goal is not
requiringany (significant) tech support at each location, right? Unless the data
> that needs to be stored at each site is small, that seems a bit unlikely to be a feasible option.
The data are independent, read-write, and different for each server. Basically they (sysadm ppl) want to facilitate
system/kernelupgrades, which is a must as old hardware is harder to support with
newest kernel versions.
Their idea is for exim4, pgsql, jboss to reside in separate docker images.
However I asked for a detailed description of the problem, in order to focus more formally on the problem.
I know docker and postgresql has been a hot topic for quite some time. First presentations said ... dont do it, but
latelywe see more and more positive experiences, articles, success stories.
Pgsql major versions and data go hand in hand, I hate to give them the illusion that separating postgresql from data is
somethingto consider.
Serious thought is needed, for sure, I am just thinking that dockerizing exim4, jboss, and other services might be a
valididea, while still keeping postgresql and data on the host ?
I had so much troubles because of unreliable system setup in the past, that I'd hate to repeat the same (or similar)
mistakesagain.
--
Achilleas Mantzios
DBA, Analyst, IT Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
