From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | "repliation" as database name |
Date: | 2018-12-18 09:48:25 |
Message-ID: | 20181218.184825.02619975.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello.
We can create a database named "replication".
$ createdb replication
A pg_hba.conf entry with DATABASE="all" is described as 'does not
match "replication"' in the comment there, but actually it
matches and we can connect to the database
"replication". (Documentation doesn't mention the restriction)
$ psql replication -At -c 'select current_database()'
replication
We can specify the name replication by quoting and it does not
match a replication connection. It is not documented at all.
pg_hba.conf
> local "replication" all trust
> #local replication all trust ## commented out
> FATAL: could not connect to the primary server: FATAL: no pg_hba.conf entry for replication connection from host "[local]", user "horiguti", SSL off
> $ psql replication -At -c 'select current_database()'
> replication
The same can be said to sameuser, samerole and even all. I think
this is absolutely sane behavior and worth documentation in any
extent if it doesn't become complex.
I think that at least the following amendments would be needed.
- Remove ""all" does not match "replication"". Instead "The "all"
keyword does not match replication connections."
- double-quoted database name is taken literally.
Is it worth doing?
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Suraj Kharage | 2018-12-18 09:57:11 | Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information. |
Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-12-18 09:41:37 | Re: Built-in connection pooling |