| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 'replication' keyword on .pgpass (Streaming Replication) |
| Date: | 2010-01-07 14:53:12 |
| Message-ID: | 22815.1262875992@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> However, wouldn't it make more logical sense to replace "host/hostssl"
>> with "replication/replicationssl" rather than overload the database
>> field?
> Seems good. How about the following formats?
> replication user CIDR-address auth-method [auth-options]
> replicationssl user CIDR-address auth-method [auth-options]
> replication user IP-address IP-mask auth-method [auth-options]
> replicationssl user IP-address IP-mask auth-method [auth-options]
> Note that "database" field has been removed since it's useless
> for replication.
I'm getting more and more confused here. I thought we were talking
about client-side .pgpass. This seems to be talking about pg_hba.conf.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-01-07 15:09:27 | Re: 'replication' keyword on .pgpass (Streaming Replication) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-01-07 14:35:52 | Re: pg_migrator issues |