Re: [GENERAL] DHCP and pg_hba.conf

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?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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