From: | Ron Atkins <theotiwii(at)earthlink(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | Postgres <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] DHCP and pg_hba.conf |
Date: | 2000-03-06 20:21:48 |
Message-ID: | 38C4135C.294C363A@earthlink.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> One trick would be add the subnets/ips into the conf file and make
> sure DHCP only gives out IP addresses from those subnets to those
> clients that are authorized.
That is an idea.
Isn't PostgreSQL limited by not utilizing some type of name resolution? Am
I looking for a work around because name resolution has yet to be added, or
is my question flawed?
Thank you for your help and your response Alfred
-Ron
PS: Another user posted this answer off list, I append our conversation:
> use localhost (127.0.0.1).
This begs the following two questions:
Question 1: If the PostgreSQL client and server do not reside on the same
host, is "localhost" just a kludge to indicate dynamic addressed clients?
Question 2: On a single system used as host and server, RMI (Remote Method
Invocation) refuses localhost as a parameter, it requires the hostname or
the IP address. Naturally PostgreSQL does what it wants, have you had the
occasion to confirm localhost works?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ed Loehr | 2000-03-06 20:26:24 | Re: [GENERAL] database corruption? |
Previous Message | Mona Kaur | 2000-03-06 20:17:13 | Postgres question |