| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Standby registration |
| Date: | 2010-09-23 09:32:07 |
| Message-ID: | 87y6aslsa0.fsf@hi-media-techno.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm, that situation can arise if there's a network glitch which leads the
> standby to disconnect, but the master still considers the connection as
> alive. When the standby reconnects, the master will see two simultaneous
> connections from the same standby. In that scenario, you clearly want to
> disconnect the old connetion in favor of the new one. Is there a scenario
> where you'd want to keep the old connection instead and refuse the new
> one?
Protection against spoofing? If connecting with the right IP is all it takes…
Regards,
--
dim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-09-23 09:34:51 | Re: Standby registration |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-09-23 09:27:18 | Re: Git cvsserver serious issue |