Installing pgpool-II fails due to naming conflict with RHEL provided library

[milobrooks]

I am unable to install pgpool-II version 4.7.0 on a Rocky 9.7 host.
The file libpcp.so.3 provided by pgpool-II-pg17 introduces a naming conflict with a file of the same name provided by RHEL Performance Co-Pilot run-time libraries package.

Below is an example install attempt:

dnf install pgpool-II-pg17 pgpool-II-pg17-extensions
Last metadata expiration check: 0:22:43 ago on Wed 07 Jan 2026 11:12:03 GMT.
Dependencies resolved.

Package Architecture Version Repository Size

Installing:
pgpool-II-pg17 x86_64 4.7.0-1pgdg.rhel9 pgpool47 1.7 M
pgpool-II-pg17-extensions x86_64 4.7.0-1pgdg.rhel9 pgpool47 49 k

Transaction Summary

Install 2 Packages

Total download size: 1.7 M
Installed size: 10 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
(1/2): pgpool-II-pg17-extensions-4.7.0-1pgdg.rhel9.x86_64.rpm 1.3 MB/s | 49 kB 00:00
(2/2): pgpool-II-pg17-4.7.0-1pgdg.rhel9.x86_64.rpm 21 MB/s | 1.7 MB 00:00

Total 20 MB/s | 1.7 MB 00:00
Running transaction check
Transaction check succeeded.
Running transaction test
The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction.
You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'.
Error: Transaction test error:
file /usr/lib64/libpcp.so.3 from install of pgpool-II-pg17-4.7.0-1pgdg.rhel9.x86_64 conflicts with file from package pcp-libs-6.3.7-5.el9.x86_64

[tatsuo-ishii]

It's a known issue.
https://www.pgpool.net/pipermail/pgpool-general/2022-June/008267.html
There's not much we can do on our side.

[devrimgunduz]

Hi @tatsuo-ishii ,

The other pcp library has been around longer than pgPool. I think we need to change the name if we want users to be able to continue using pgpool. It is even worse on some platforms (SLES) that they pick up the other pcp and then break the installation in full.

[tatsuo-ishii]

The other pcp library has been around longer than pgPool.

You are right. It was first released in 1995, while Pgpool-II was first released in 2004.

I think we need to change the name if we want users to be able to continue using pgpool.

Let me think about it.

[devrimgunduz]

Thank you @tatsuo-ishii .

[tatsuo-ishii]

If we change the shared library name, it definitely breaks existing libpcp.so clients. I think we cannot change the shared library name in Pgpool-II minor releases. If we would do that, it should happen in the next Pgpool-II major release (supposed to be released by the end of 2026) at the earliest.

[devrimgunduz]

Hi @tatsuo-ishii ,

I do agree that a major release is needed for that. OTOH I am not sure waiting for a year s a good idea or not.

Installations are broken for a long time...

What would it take to release a new major release which features only renaming a library and do it early?

Thanks!