From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Another crack at doing a Win32 |
Date: | 2004-03-05 17:38:13 |
Message-ID: | 4048BB05.6090100@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Perhaps there is a case to be made
>that on all platforms, "-i" should enable or disable only nonlocal
>connections. Without -i we'd only allow binding to loopback ports
>(either IP4 or IP6).
>
>Aside from keeping the Windows and Unix behaviors similar, this would be
>of some positive benefit for people who use TCP-only clients. They'd
>not have to remember to set -i anymore, unless they want remote access.
>
>
I've been caught by this more than once, because I use local JDBC
clients, so now the first thing I do after initdb is to set tcpip_socket
to true.
>In response to Andrew's table, here's what I'm visualizing:
>
>* No -i: bind only to loopback addresses (both IP4 and IP6 if available).
>
>
OK.
>* With -i, but not virtual_host: bind to all available addresses.
>
>
OK.
>* With -i and virtual_host: bind to specified address(es) only.
>
>
Can you bind one socket to more than one address? My understanding is
that it's all (IN_ADDR_ANY or in6_addr_any) or one. In that case with
this proposal we'd have to force all the communications through that
interface on Windows. Or would we use multiple sockets (in which case
there is probably a good case for allowing multiple addresses in
virtual_host)?
... (haven't toured this part of the code before) ....
I see what looks like an array of listen sockets, so multiple sockets
seems the way to go.
>
>I don't have a strong feeling about the case of virtual_host without -i.
>The above says to ignore virtual_host, but maybe we should instead
>ignore the lack of -i and do what virtual_host says.
>
>
>
I have no strong feelings either.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lawrence E. Smithmier, Jr. | 2004-03-05 17:41:24 | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |
Previous Message | Dennis Haney | 2004-03-05 17:28:54 | IN joining |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lawrence E. Smithmier, Jr. | 2004-03-05 17:41:24 | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-05 16:58:50 | Re: [HACKERS] Another crack at doing a Win32 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Gray | 2004-03-05 19:58:13 | Re: Updated version of contrib/xml (at last) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-05 16:58:50 | Re: [HACKERS] Another crack at doing a Win32 |