FAQ
Hi,


I submitted a patch to RedHat's bugzilla enabling the compilation (and
packaging) of Slony-1 when postgresql is built. The diff is against
7.4.3-2 currently available on rawhide. Please see bug #127707
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127707> for
more information and for the patch. An updated SRPM is available
at <http://www.a51.org/sw/fedora/postgresql-7.4.3-2.1.src.rpm>.

It would be nice if the upstream rpm distribution had Slony-1 as well as
RedHat has wanted to keep their packages close to yours. :)

Thanks.

--
Kaj J. Niemi
+358 45 63 12000
<kajtzu@basen.net>

Search Discussions

  • Lamar Owen at Jul 13, 2004 at 3:26 pm

    On Monday 12 July 2004 15:49, Kaj J.Niemi wrote:
    It would be nice if the upstream rpm distribution had Slony-1 as well as
    RedHat has wanted to keep their packages close to yours. :)
    Follow the discussion in Red Hat's bugzilla.

    The short of it:
    Slony is a strategic piece of the RPM puzzle, in that it can upgrade (or
    downgrade) between major versions. This has been a serious thorn in the side
    of upgrades for a long time, and I believe Slony I is part of the solution.

    Since Slony I requires a full PostgreSQL source tree against which to build,
    it makes sense to me to package it together (in a separate subpackage,
    perhaps) with the main RPM set. HOWEVER, this really isn't ideal due to the
    lack of synchronism in the release cycles.

    But we have already done this with PygreSQL AND the JDBC client, neither of
    which are synched to the main tree schedule.

    Comments, anyone?

    (the other strategic piece of this pie is making multiple major versions
    coexist; this way you keep running the older version until you want to
    migrate, at which point you set up slony to migrate.)
    --
    Lamar Owen
    Director of Information Technology
    Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
    1 PARI Drive
    Rosman, NC 28772
    (828)862-5554
    www.pari.edu
  • Peter Eisentraut at Jul 13, 2004 at 4:52 pm

    Lamar Owen wrote:
    Since Slony I requires a full PostgreSQL source tree against which to
    build, it makes sense to me to package it together (in a separate
    subpackage, perhaps) with the main RPM set. HOWEVER, this really
    isn't ideal due to the lack of synchronism in the release cycles.
    It actually looks fairly trivial make slony independent of the
    PostgreSQL source tree. One just has to copy over the Makefile.shlib
    and dependencies (and adjust the configure script a bit).
  • Lamar Owen at Jul 13, 2004 at 9:50 pm

    On Tuesday 13 July 2004 12:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
    Lamar Owen wrote:
    Since Slony I requires a full PostgreSQL source tree against which to
    build, it makes sense to me to package it together (in a separate
    subpackage, perhaps) with the main RPM set. HOWEVER, this really
    isn't ideal due to the lack of synchronism in the release cycles.
    It actually looks fairly trivial make slony independent of the
    PostgreSQL source tree. One just has to copy over the Makefile.shlib
    and dependencies (and adjust the configure script a bit).
    Good. That is something I need to mung for the 7.5 -devel subpackage anyway.
    If it can be made to build Slony, then it probably can be made to build other
    modules.

    So I should have said '..Slony wants and full PostgreSQL source tree...' Too
    many things _want_ a full source tree. This has been a historic problem, as
    you well know.
    --
    Lamar Owen
    Director of Information Technology
    Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
    1 PARI Drive
    Rosman, NC 28772
    (828)862-5554
    www.pari.edu
  • Kaj J.Niemi at Jul 13, 2004 at 4:53 pm

    Since Slony I requires a full PostgreSQL source tree against which to build,
    it makes sense to me to package it together (in a separate subpackage,
    perhaps) with the main RPM set.
    Right. That's how it is with the patch I submitted. The alternative is to
    use something similar to the .spec file that comes with slony1 and extend
    it to include the postgresql source tree, build it with some sane options
    and then compile Slony-1 while discarding the postgresql sources.

    I don't have a problem with either option as long as somebody makes the
    policy decision what to do. ;-) I am trying to avoid doing something which
    is only relevant to a single project (the one I'm working on right now)
    and thus would prefer to package something that benefits everybody.

    Thanks.


    --
    Kaj J. Niemi
    +358 45 63 12000
    <kajtzu@basen.net>

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-ports @
categoriespostgresql
postedJul 12, '04 at 7:50p
activeJul 13, '04 at 9:50p
posts5
users3
websitepostgresql.org
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase