Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket?

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Sabaini <peter(dot)sabaini(at)ait(dot)ac(dot)at>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket?
Date: 2010-05-04 20:04:38
Message-ID: w2ydcc563d11005041304ufc8ee23dy2e0873df298d2b5f@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Peter Sabaini <peter(dot)sabaini(at)ait(dot)ac(dot)at> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 11:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Sabaini <peter(dot)sabaini(at)ait(dot)ac(dot)at> writes:
>> > it seems Postgres tries to send a UDP packet to a random high port to
>> > communicate with the statistics collector daemon. We have rather strict
>> > packet filter rules in place, and I'd like to make the system use a
>> > fixed port for this, or even better a Unix domain socket. Is this
>> > possible (setting a compile time or run time parameter)?
>>
>> No, the stats collector just uses whatever port bind() chooses for it.
>
> A pity.
>
>> I'd suggest backing off your ideas about how much filtering is
>> appropriate for local connections.
>
> Since we're running multiple database instances with different projects
> on one machine I'd like to isolate them as best I can.

Maybe running them in individual VMs would do that.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-05-04 20:09:12 Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket?
Previous Message Peter Sabaini 2010-05-04 19:41:21 Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket?