Re: Unix-domain socket support on Windows

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unix-domain socket support on Windows
Date: 2019-08-07 15:15:59
Message-ID: CABUevEwW4dg8p4XKOO5a8dZ=J-XyTF+eCaQsAnRB1VEVLNLKYQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 4:59 PM Peter Eisentraut <
peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:

> On 2019-08-07 16:06, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > Am I reading the patches correctly, that getpeereid() still doesn't work
> > on Windows? That means that peer authentication doesn't work, right?
> > That's a bit sad. One of the big advantages of unix domain sockets over
> > TCP is peer authentication.
>
> Correct, it's not supported. I think it's plausible that they will add
> this in the future.
>

Does it work well enough that SSPI auth can run over it? SSPI auth with the
local provider gives you more or less the same results as peer, doesn't it?

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-08-07 15:39:32 Re: is necessary to recheck cached data in fn_extra?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-08-07 15:08:57 Re: Grouping isolationtester tests in the schedule