>>I spent most of yesterday trying to get 9.6.13 installed from the PostgreSQL Yum repository and finally >>got it
workingwith the initdb stuff stored on a non-default dedicated partition (RAID10 array) only to >>find that psql didn't
workand was complaining about a missing libpq.so.5. Not sure if that's a common >>problem?
>
>What packages did you install?
>
Initially, postgresql96.x86_64, postgresql96-server.x86_64, postgresql96-contrib.x86_64 all via Yum. Then when psql was
complainingabout the missing library, I also tried installing postgresql96-libs.x86_64 via yum, which reported "nothing
todo". Despite naming the four packages, yum only appeared to actually install two of them, postgresql96-server and
postgresql96-contrib.A search for libpq.so.5 after the various attempts to install showed nothing on the server. I then
downloadedthe postgresql96-libs-9.6.13-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64.rpm direct from the repository and tried to install that on
it'sown via rpm but that reported that it was already installed.
In the end, I yum removed all postgresql related files and deleted any postgresql related files/directories on the file
systemthen manually installed the libs rpm outside yum, before re-installing the original three packages and hey
presto,all working fine this time around and yum list installed shows them all in the list of installed packages.
>>My (admittedly loose) logic tells me that upgrading from 9.1.x to 9.6.x is probably a safer option than >>making the
leapup to 10.x or 11.x
>>
>No, not really.
Yup, moving straight to 11.x would definitely be a better long term bet and I may well try migrating one of these db's
acrossto it now I've eeked out a bit of breathing space.
>>but I wonder whether that might be an easier/more reliable option from an install and point of view and >>certainly
preferablein the long term. Any advice on where to go?
>11.x would be best, since it's EOL is furthest in the future.
>9.6 would be best, because it's had more bug-fix releases.
