| From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah(dot)rajesh(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: "all" not inclusive of "replication" in pg_hba.conf |
| Date: | 2011-09-26 18:47:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1317062826.2085.3.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 11:58 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:07 PM, Rajesh Kumar Mallah
> <mallah(dot)rajesh(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Dear List ,
> >
> > It is been found that the entry
> >
> > local all all trust
> >
> > does not renders below redundant in pg_hba.conf
> >
> > local replication replicator01 trust
>
> I noticed this too, and I think it should. Either way, the
> documentation isn't clear on this point -- either 'all' should include
> the faux replication database or it should be noted in appropriate
> places that 'all' doesn't/can't do that.
>
"all" includes all real databases, not "virtual" one. The documentation
could probably be clearer, but "all" shouldn't include the virtual
"replication" database.
--
Guillaume
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Filip Rembiałkowski | 2011-09-26 18:58:00 | Re: Does postgresql 9.0.4 use index on PREFIX%SUFFIX queries? |
| Previous Message | Day, David | 2011-09-26 18:42:03 | ECPG Segmentation fault on retreiving timestamp column into sqlda. |