Re: Could pgsql jdbc support pool reauthentication?

From: Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Could pgsql jdbc support pool reauthentication?
Date: 2017-11-16 12:22:03
Message-ID: 9887a72e-6e17-2459-a693-33c99fca3e14@matrix.gatewaynet.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On 16/11/2017 12:15, Dave Cramer wrote:
> just provide a PR for pgbouncer here https://github.com/pgbouncer/pgbouncer
>
Had tried that as well. No reaction. IMHO for a project that is supposed to be so vital (like in "but if you have a pgbouncer in front of PostgreSQL (you should) and..." there should be more activity.
I mean, not having pgbouncer is supposed to be bad, but OTOH making pgbouncer work in a (semi-)enterprise environment (LDAP/search_path based multi-tenancy) looks like a journey in the mid ocean.
> Dave Cramer
>
> davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com <mailto:davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com>
> www.postgresintl.com <http://www.postgresintl.com>
>
> On 16 November 2017 at 03:30, Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com <mailto:achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> Hello again,
>
> After looking at pgbouncer master branch, which supports PAM authentication and indirectly LDAP, I decided to give it a go. Also I had to do some minor patches to both the backend's GUC code,
> and pgbouncer in order to respect search_path and make it usable with transaction_mode (which IMHO is the main benefit of using pgbouncer vs the competition) - + it is the best bet closest to
> re-authentication, which postgresql does not support out of the box (and is fairly complicated to do so).
> After all those (not so trivial) changes I tested pgbouncer with my app, and I got sort of promising results, but also had a few unexpected failures as well.
> Sad thing is that neither pgbouncer's mailing list seems very active , despite having subscribed successfully it still fails to accept my emails, nor do I see the project at github very active,
> or any announcement for a new release soon .
>
> So I don't really know how to contact the pgbouncer community.
>
>
> On 01/11/2017 14:55, Dave Cramer wrote:
>> yes, and with a bit of work you should be able to port the changes over to the current pgbouncer
>>
>> Dave Cramer
>>
>> davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com <mailto:davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com>
>> www.postgresintl.com <http://www.postgresintl.com>
>>
>> On 31 October 2017 at 07:52, Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com <mailto:achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 31/10/2017 13:08, Dave Cramer wrote:
>>> Pivotal has a branch of pgbouncer that supports LDAP.
>> Great news Dave, thanx, you mean this repo right ? : https://github.com/greenplum-db/pgbouncer <https://github.com/greenplum-db/pgbouncer>
>>
>>>
>>> Dave Cramer
>>>
>>> davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com <mailto:davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com>
>>> www.postgresintl.com <http://www.postgresintl.com>
>>>
>>> On 31 October 2017 at 07:00, Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com <mailto:achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 31/10/2017 12:56, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31/10/17 10:08, Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Vladimir, thanx
>>>
>>> On 31/10/2017 10:30, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
>>>
>>> Achilleas>So if say we need 5 connections max for the most complex app to work, and we have 200 users, then at peak time, the total number of connections would have to be
>>> raised to 1000.
>>>
>>> Pools can shrink, so you do not have to raise total number of connections to 1000 unless you truly expect 1000 concurrent connections.
>>>
>>> I know, but we still risk having our max_connections exceeded. And this is not scaleable.
>>>
>>>
>>>     That's true, but if you have a pgbouncer in front of PostgreSQL (you should) and the connections are used wisely (i.e. they are returned as soon as they finish the job, they
>>> don't sit idle) this is no longer a problem.
>>>
>>> That would be a blessing if pgbouncer supported LDAP .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Álvaro
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Achilleas Mantzios
>>> IT DEV Lead
>>> IT DEPT
>>> Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org <mailto:pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>)
>>> To make changes to your subscription:
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc <http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Achilleas Mantzios
>> IT DEV Lead
>> IT DEPT
>> Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
>>
>>
>
> --
> Achilleas Mantzios
> IT DEV Lead
> IT DEPT
> Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
>
>

--
Achilleas Mantzios
IT DEV Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2017-11-16 12:31:46 Re: Could pgsql jdbc support pool reauthentication?
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2017-11-16 10:15:07 Re: Could pgsql jdbc support pool reauthentication?