From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: "repliation" as database name |
Date: | 2018-12-26 17:59:32 |
Message-ID: | 32289.1545847172@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> I found that in the documentation thanks to a notification
> off-list. And after some reconfirmation, what I want to fix is
> only a few lines of comment in pg_hba.conf.sample.
> -# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all"
> -# keyword does not match "replication". Access to replication
> -# must be enabled in a separate record (see example below).
> +# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all" keyword
> +# matches all databases. The "replication" keyword matches a physical
> +# replication connection request and it must be enabled in a separate
> +# record (see example below)
Hm, I agree that the para doesn't read very well now, but I think this
could be improved further. How about something like
# DATABASE can be "all", "sameuser", "samerole", "replication", a
# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "replication"
# keyword matches replication connection requests (see example below).
# The "all" keyword matches all database names, but not replication
# connections.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-12-26 18:02:17 | Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-12-26 17:51:12 | Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums |