Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
---|
From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | all keyword for pg_hba.conf host column |
Date: | 2010-10-16 10:56:43 |
Message-ID: | 1287226603.5599.8.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
As a small addition to the pg_hba.conf host name feature, I figured it
would be useful to allow "all" in the host column, instead of having to
write 0.0.0.0/0 and ::/0. Patch attached.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
hba-host-all.patch | text/x-patch | 1.7 KB |
From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: all keyword for pg_hba.conf host column |
Date: | 2010-10-16 15:03:57 |
Message-ID: | A4043E85-2289-4061-8BFB-B7EC59F6CE11@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct 16, 2010, at 6:56 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> As a small addition to the pg_hba.conf host name feature, I figured it
> would be useful to allow "all" in the host column, instead of having to
> write 0.0.0.0/0 and ::/0. Patch attached.
+1. Looks sane on a quick read.
...Robert
From: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: all keyword for pg_hba.conf host column |
Date: | 2010-10-16 15:11:46 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikWBJRjDsYDGQrkSEXqAqC+qYKdXGZjwXeq9x+e@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16 October 2010 21:56, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> As a small addition to the pg_hba.conf host name feature, I figured it
> would be useful to allow "all" in the host column, instead of having to
> write 0.0.0.0/0 and ::/0. Patch attached.
>
Cool. And, for what it's worth, this doesn't conflict at all with the
field-specific keywords patch I just submitted.
Cheers,
BJ