On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 09:34:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 12:59:16PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Anyway, can give this patch a try?
> > I've only compiled postgres once before and this is a production environment
> > (althought nothing so important that the crashes are a serious concern 
> > either).
> > Is it reasonable to wget the postgres tarball, apply the patch, and run the
> > compiled postgres binary from the source tree, without running make install 
> > or
> > similar ?  Otherwise, would it be good enough to copy the postgres binary to
> > /usr/pgsql-10/bin (and reinstall the binary package later) ?
> The trick in this sort of situation is to make sure you build binaries
> that match your existing install in every way except having the added
> patch, and maybe getting installed into a different directory.
> So: where did you get the existing binaries?  If it's from some vendor
> packaging system, what you should do is fetch the package source, add
> the patch to the probably-nonempty set of patches the vendor is applying,
> and rebuild your own custom package version.  If you haven't done that
> before, it's a good skill to acquire ...

I'm familiar with that process; but, these are PG10 binaries from PGDG for
centos6 x64.  I had to add symlinks for postgis library, but otherwise seems to
be working fine (although I didn't preserve as many configure options as your
message would suggest I should have).


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to