Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Stuff for 2.4.1

From: Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org, David Blewett <david(at)dawninglight(dot)net>, harald(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
Subject: Re: Stuff for 2.4.1
Date: 2011-03-27 19:36:47
Message-ID: AANLkTin6=tgzGOJtYU6TnSpyOPCdgtmv4XxTLxBjkLeG@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: psycopg
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 8:01 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> I am not entirely against your argument, but if you are going to make the
> above statement at least compare apples to apples. In Natty the released
> version of Psycopg2 is 2.2.1 , so 2.4.1 is not an option by your rules.

Once you have system packages libpq-dev and python-dev, psycopg can be
installed just with "easy_install psycopg2" and can be easily put in
per-user or per-project directories. Using non-system python packages
for a project is not uncommon at all, whereas I find always more
resistance from people to compile stuff for their /usr/local/.

Even if you wouldn't be able to upgrade system packages, you could
always compile the libpq yourself, but then you have to be careful to
the LD_LIBRARY_PATH to link the correct library at runtime. It would
be easy to have software passing all the tests and then failing when
deployed because of an upstart script not configured properly. It's
just too brittle and I feel we can avoid annoying situations like
this.

> Also, it is possible for people to run a Pg 9.0 on newer distributions:
>
> https://launchpad.net/~pitti/+archive/postgresql

Of course this is the best option to get PG9 today.

-- Daniele

In response to

psycopg by date

Next:From: Federico Di GregorioDate: 2011-03-28 07:11:10
Subject: Re: Stuff for 2.4.1
Previous:From: Karsten HilbertDate: 2011-03-27 19:18:26
Subject: Re: Stuff for 2.4.1

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group