On 11/12/21 6:31 μ.μ., Michael Lewis wrote:
Interesting. I'm not sure that moving an image for a VM with Postgres is compatible with the goal of minimizing time/data but if upgrades are yearly or something, perhaps that is reasonable. It has
been 9+ years since that post as well. But the full data will need to be included in the image if the goal is not requiring any (significant) tech support at each location, right? Unless the data
that needs to be stored at each site is small, that seems a bit unlikely to be a feasible option.
The data are independent, read-write, and different for each server. Basically they (sysadm ppl) want to facilitate system/kernel upgrades, which is a must as old hardware is harder to support with
newest kernel versions.
Their idea is for exim4, pgsql, jboss to reside in separate docker images.
However I asked for a detailed description of the problem, in order to focus more formally on the problem.
I know docker and postgresql has been a hot topic for quite some time. First presentations said ... dont do it, but lately we see more and more positive experiences, articles, success stories.
Pgsql major versions and data go hand in hand, I hate to give them the illusion that separating postgresql from data is something to consider.
Serious thought is needed, for sure, I am just thinking that dockerizing exim4, jboss, and other services might be a valid idea, while still keeping postgresql and data on the host ?
I had so much troubles because of unreliable system setup in the past, that I'd hate to repeat the same (or similar) mistakes again.
--
Achilleas Mantzios
DBA, Analyst, IT Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
