| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [9.1] pg_stat_get_backend_server_addr |
| Date: | 2010-05-28 15:01:58 |
| Message-ID: | 1275058918.6851.8.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2010-05-28 at 10:21 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> ... indeed. Is it worth burdening the pg_stats mechanism with this?
> > >> The use case seems vanishingly thin.
> >
> > > I am confused how this is different from inet_server_addr() and
> > > inet_server_port().
> >
> > I think the point is to let someone find out *from another session*
> > which server port number a particular session is using. I fail to see
> > a significant use case for that, though.
>
> Uh, aren't they all using the same server port number, e.g. 5432? Is
> the issue different IP addresses for the same server?
Yes, I would like to know who is connecting to what IP address. It's
useful if you have HA setups and you need to check which way your
connections are going.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-28 15:02:52 | Re: [9.1] pg_stat_get_backend_server_addr |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-05-28 14:26:52 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |