| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rocco Altier <RoccoA(at)Routescape(dot)com>, Nigel Kukard <nkukard(at)lbsd(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: IPv6 patch |
| Date: | 2003-01-27 21:09:18 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0301271907320.789-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian writes:
> However, the server log messages stating an IPv6 socket was not made is
> only printed if the binary supports IPv6. The message seems to be a
> compromise between those who wanted a separate IPv6 GUC/flag and those
> who wanted it to silently fail on IPv6.
I'm not sure. Those who wanted silence don't get any silence and those
who wanted a configurable hard failure get neither the configurability nor
any failure.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-01-27 21:09:45 | Re: Win32 port patches submitted |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-27 21:02:54 | Re: Cannot connect to the database (PG 7.3) |