From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 'replication' keyword on .pgpass (Streaming Replication) |
Date: | 2010-01-07 12:39:41 |
Message-ID: | 4B45D60D.5030308@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The attached patch supports new keyword 'replication' on .pgpass file.
>> This keyword is used to specify the password for the standby server to
>> connect to the primary server.
>
> This strikes me as a completely bad idea. We need get no farther than
> the point that it assumes nobody can have a database named "replication"
> (although I notice the patch also appears to assume that libpq knows
> internally that the connection is for replication --- I thought we were
> going to avoid libpq changes for SR?)
As the patch stands there's an extra startup packet, similar to
SSLRequest, in the connection handshake. But I think we should get rid
of that too, and just send an extra "replication=on" option along with
username and other options in the startup packet.
(as Fujii pointed out already, you can have a database called
"replication". But you need to quote it in pg_hba.conf, like you need to
quote "all" and "sameuser/group/role".)
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-01-07 12:40:00 | Re: pg_migrator issues |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-01-07 12:37:01 | advantage of new vacuum |