Re: pg on Debian servers

From: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Mark Morgan Lloyd <markMLl(dot)pgsql-general(at)telemetry(dot)co(dot)uk>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg on Debian servers
Date: 2017-11-11 13:28:05
Message-ID: 20171111132805.twahvztncovbp3gt@msg.df7cb.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Re: Magnus Hagander 2017-11-11 <CABUevExt7aLarQ2RE5KP9rRUTQSioAxi5FMq=JJ9neBTbC++OA(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> > Is there any way that either the package maintainer or a site
> > administrator/programmer such as myself can mark the Postgres server
> > packages as "manual upgrade only" or similar? Or since I'm almost certainly
> > not the first person to be bitten by this, is there a preferred hack in
> > mitigation?
>
>
> Certainly. Unrelated to PostgreSQL, this is a standard feature in Debian.
> Commonly used to prevent things like kernel upgrades from happening on the
> same schedule as others.
>
> Basically, you put the package "on hold". See the debian administratino
> guide at
> https://debian-administration.org/article/67/Preventing_Debian_Package_Upgrades

Another thing you can do is preventing package upgrades from
stopping/starting services by using a policy-rc.d:

https://jpetazzo.github.io/2013/10/06/policy-rc-d-do-not-start-services-automatically/
https://people.debian.org/~hmh/invokerc.d-policyrc.d-specification.txt

However, if you do that, you need to take measures to actually restart
into the new version manually later.

Christoph

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2017-11-11 13:30:07 Re: pg on Debian servers
Previous Message Christoph Berg 2017-11-11 13:23:54 Re: Postgres 10.1 fails to start: server did not start in time