Thread: which version? old user coming back....
I use to use postgres quite a bit but have been working on a project for a couple years that does not use it. I have finally convinced them to make the switch after our current database hsqldb couldn't keep up with the task. So, for this project I will need postgres working on a debian server (2.4.x), a centos 4 (2.6x) server and windows boxes for development. Since I last used postgres it appears that it has become windows friendly. Hurray at least for the developers. I have looked and it appears that both the apt(debian) and yum (centos) repositories are living in the past with version 7.5x. Clearly the windows users will want to use 8+. So what do i do? What do you recommend? 1)Do I run these old versions on my linux servers and the new version 8.1x for development? If I do this will I have to constantly battle compatibility issues when going from development to the production servers? Will it be a big headache? Will I be missing out on major performance or features? 2)Is there a reliable way to install 8.1x on debian and centos using apt and yum? 3)Should I just compile from source on the linux boxes? Should I expect any problems with this even on the old 2.4 kernel? I would rather avoid this cause I really like letting apt and yum maintain my compatibility issues? thanks everyone
developer@wexwarez.com writes:
> 1)Do I run these old versions on my linux servers and the new version 8.1x
> for development? If I do this will I have to constantly battle
> compatibility issues when going from development to the production
> servers? Will it be a big headache? Will I be missing out on major
> performance or features?
No, yes, yes, and yes. You do not want to be running PG 7.anything
anymore if you can help it. If your intention is to go into production
very soon, standardize on 8.1.x ... if your production release date is a
few months out, you'd be doing yourself a favor to adopt 8.2 now.
(8.2RC1 should be available by Monday.)
> 2)Is there a reliable way to install 8.1x on debian and centos using apt
> and yum?
Look into Debian unstable, or if you are partial to Red Hat-derived
stuff look into Fedora.
> 3)Should I just compile from source on the linux boxes? Should I expect
> any problems with this even on the old 2.4 kernel?
I'd advise you to be using a 2.6 kernel at this point, too. I don't
know what the Centos guys have in mind as a schedule for releasing
a 2.6-based distro, but again Fedora is at least as good a bet if you
want a Red Hat based distro without official Red Hat support.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 04:23:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > I'd advise you to be using a 2.6 kernel at this point, too. I don't > know what the Centos guys have in mind as a schedule for releasing > a 2.6-based distro, but again Fedora is at least as good a bet if you > want a Red Hat based distro without official Red Hat support. FWIW, CentOS is basically following RedHat Enterprise Linux, building distros based on the sources RedHat releases for their Enterprise Linux. Thus CentOS 4 is RHEL 4, which is 2.6 based. My CentOS 4.4 (RHEL4update4) is running a Linux 2.6.9-42.0.3.EL kernel. Of course RedHat version numbers (and thus CentOS) don't really compare to the actual software. All this means is they started with a 2.6.9 kernel and have heavily patched it (at least 42 releases of the package). -- rgds Stephen
Thanks for the reply. > developer@wexwarez.com writes: >> 1)Do I run these old versions on my linux servers and the new version >> 8.1x >> for development? If I do this will I have to constantly battle >> compatibility issues when going from development to the production >> servers? Will it be a big headache? Will I be missing out on major >> performance or features? > > No, yes, yes, and yes. You do not want to be running PG 7.anything > anymore if you can help it. If your intention is to go into production > very soon, standardize on 8.1.x ... if your production release date is a > few months out, you'd be doing yourself a favor to adopt 8.2 now. > (8.2RC1 should be available by Monday.) Is 8.2 that much different from 8.1? The change log seems to indicate an easy upgrade using pg dump. I really need stability, is 8.2 really there yet? > >> 2)Is there a reliable way to install 8.1x on debian and centos using apt >> and yum? > > Look into Debian unstable, or if you are partial to Red Hat-derived > stuff look into Fedora. I have and if it is there I can't find it. > >> 3)Should I just compile from source on the linux boxes? Should I expect >> any problems with this even on the old 2.4 kernel? > > I'd advise you to be using a 2.6 kernel at this point, too. I don't > know what the Centos guys have in mind as a schedule for releasing > a 2.6-based distro, but again Fedora is at least as good a bet if you > want a Red Hat based distro without official Red Hat support. > I agree with your sentiments on 2.6. The Centos 4 is a 2.6 kernel, however the debian server I am using is 2.4 just because it has been around for a while and I probably can't change that for another year. I assume 8 will still work on 2.4 though. > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match >
developer@wexwarez.com wrote: > 2)Is there a reliable way to install 8.1x on debian and centos using > apt and yum? For Debian, take a look at backports.org. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
developer@wexwarez.com wrote: >>> ...Should I expect >>> any problems with this even on the old 2.4 kernel? >> >> I'd advise you to be using a 2.6 kernel at this point, too. >> > ... I assume 8 will still work on 2.4 though. IIRC, you need a reasonably modern 2.6 kernel (early 2005) if you want fsync() to flush the write caches on hard disks (IDE and SATA and SCSI included). The Linux SATA driver author explains here: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=149349&cid=12519114 Anyone know if those write barrier patches were ever backported into the 2.4 kernels? If not, I think you need to either use 2.6 or disable the disk's write caches and suffer the performance hits.
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 01:38:17PM -0800, developer@wexwarez.com wrote: > > Look into Debian unstable, or if you are partial to Red Hat-derived > > stuff look into Fedora. > > I have and if it is there I can't find it. Where are you looking? http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/postgresql-7.4 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/postgresql-8.0 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/postgresql-8.1 http://packages.debian.org/experimental/misc/postgresql-8.2 Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.