Re: fork/exec

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: Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Win32 port list <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: fork/exec
Date: 2003-11-28 21:33:04
Message-ID: 1364.1070055184@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Oh, good. I couldn't remember if it was the postmaster or child that
> validates that key. I now remember only the postmaster needs the secret
> because it sends the signal.

However, the child process needs the secret for long enough to send it
off to the client at the completion of the authentication handshake.
So there is a problem to resolve here.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-28 21:42:10 Re: fork/exec
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-11-28 21:24:22 Re: fork/exec