Re: pg_hba changes not honored

From: "Aaron Bono" <postgresql(at)aranya(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_hba changes not honored
Date: 2006-08-27 18:58:25
Message-ID: bf05e51c0608271158l23efeb4br363eb4d1c3effab8@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On 8/23/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> "Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com> writes:
> > Pg_ctl is pointing to the same directory that postmaster points to on
> > startup. There is only 1 data directory/postgres installation that I
> > use.
>
> > Pg_ctl informs that postmaster is signaled. When I see the logs for
> > postmaster, it says "received SIGHUP, reloading configuration files"
>
> Well, I just re-tested it here, and it works fine for me (using 8.1.4,
> but I don't see anything in the CVS logs indicating changes in the
> relevant code since 8.1.2). So I still think there's some sort of
> pilot error involved here, but I'm running out of ideas about what.
> You might want to try the strace experiment I suggested to confirm
> that the postmaster is reading the file you think it is.

Could it be that the JDBC client creates a connection and keeps that
connection open (common with connection poolilng)? If you SIGHUP the
postmaster, will it disconnect already connected clients or does it only
reject new connections?

I say this since you said doing a restart fixes the problem.

==================================================================
Aaron Bono
Aranya Software Technologies, Inc.
http://www.aranya.com
http://codeelixir.com
==================================================================

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sriram Dandapani 2006-08-27 19:38:02 Re: pg_hba changes not honored
Previous Message Shoaib Mir 2006-08-26 15:15:00 Re: DB Synchronization.