| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Kurt Roeckx <Q(at)ping(dot)be>, Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net>, Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
| Date: | 2003-02-02 17:49:34 |
| Message-ID: | 12285.1044208174@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Gavin Sherry wrote:
>> I don't think we should listen on IPv6 just because it is supported. It
>> should be a configuration variable:
>>
>> tcpip_socket = true
>> ipv6 = true
> We had a huge discussion on this. I think you were away for it. You
> can control what you listen on by modifying pg_hba.conf.
Can you actually control whether the postmaster is listening by
modifying pg_hba.conf? I don't think so.
I think I was the one who talked us into assuming that ipv4 and ipv6
should be treated as a single protocol. But some people have since made
pretty good cases that it's better to regard them as separate protocols.
Perhaps we should rethink that decision.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-02-02 18:51:36 | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
| Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-02-02 17:04:57 | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hans-Jürgen Schönig | 2003-02-02 18:01:58 | Re: COUNT and Performance ... |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-02 17:26:12 | Re: PostgreSQL, NetBSD and NFS |