On 06/01/2010 03:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <m...@webthatworks.it> writes: >> On Mon, 31 May 2010 08:47:25 -0600 >> Scott Marlowe <scott.marl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Pgsql is pretty easy to build from source. > >> Yeah it is. But what is it going to be an upgrade process? On a >> production box? > > If it makes you feel better, build your own RPMs (or > $package-style-of-choice). This is actually a pretty good idea if you > are on a package-manager-based platform, as it makes it far simpler to > keep track of exactly what you've got installed. It's generally not > hard to take the source package supplied by your distro and stick a > new minor-release source tarball into it.
Amen. We do this for anything not supplied with RHEL, although our first trip is usually a quick look at the EPEL repos to see if they have a suitable build we can use. As an aside, though, I personally gave up the gotta-have-the-latest treadmill some time ago. There's a lot to be said for letting a distribution engineering team spend the time and effort tracking security fixes and suchlike. (And to answer the original question, I'd use RHEL or CentOS; but these things tend to devolve into a simple way of exposing the distro prejudices of the responders) -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
