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

linux standard layout

From: Ben Kim <bkim(at)tamu(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: linux standard layout
Date: 2010-03-09 05:31:40
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-admin
Dear list,

I have about 20 postgresql databases, about 3-4 GB in total.

We are moving them from Solaris/SPARC to a linux based virtual machine.

I don't like the VMWare environment, but it's not my choice, and assuming 
the cpu load is ok, will there be any benefits if I put each database on 
separate partitions, vs. simply using the one data directory?

Also, how is using standard rpm, with its standard layout (/var/lib/pgsql, 
/usr/lib/pgsql, ...), generally regarded? ( vs. compiling everything ?) 
Does anyone think using the rpm is unprofessional or something that only 
beginners will do?

I have someone who opposes the use of standard rpms (even yums) for this 
reason. I thought I'd check out how it is received professionally.

I ask the question because sometimes I feel uneasy mixing rpms and source 

If I compile something from the source, sometimes I see a boundary 
condition - like, if I already have DBI from a standard rpm, it expects 
postgresql library at a certain location - making me wonder whether I 
should remove the DBI rpm and compile it also from the source, or whether 
I should use standard rpms for postgresql as well. (DBI may not be a good 

In general I didn't have any problems yet with standard rpms and I can 
make the rpms work if there's a problem, but I may be missing something.

Any advice or reference to a relevant article on this issue will be 


Ben Kim


pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Scott MarloweDate: 2010-03-09 05:48:09
Subject: Re: linux standard layout
Previous:From: Vitaly BurshteynDate: 2010-03-08 21:36:33
Subject: WAL high avail

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group