Re: IPV4 addresses on IPV6 machines in pg_hba.conf
От | |
---|---|
Тема | Re: IPV4 addresses on IPV6 machines in pg_hba.conf |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2520.24.211.141.25.1062809182.squirrel@www.dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | IPV4 addresses on IPV6 machines in pg_hba.conf (Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane said: > Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de> writes: >> are you sure it's not just for beauty's sake? > > What I didn't like about your last patch was the close coupling of the CIDR/netmask processing to the v4-to-v6 conversion; as Andrew pointed out, you were hacking into hba.c functionality that overlapped with SockAddr_cidr_mask. Doing the conversion after we've collected the netmask seems a lot cleaner to me. Also, this way keeps a fairly decent separation of interests between hba.c (parsing the hba.conf syntax) and ip.c (messing with address representations). > >> While talking about beauty: that setting of *cidr_slash to '/' and 0 doesn't look too esthetic... > > It is ugly (and I didn't write it ;-)). But if we palloc'd a modified version of the token we'd have to remember to pfree it, so it nets out to about the same amount of code either way I think. If you wanna try to clean it up more, be my guest ... > I wrote it :-) The reason is that alone of the tokens in this file address/mask is a composite. I agree it is a bit ugly. In fact, this whole function is ugly and getting uglier and needs recasting. I intend to have a go at that, since I am partly responsible, but not in the present cycle. Nobody objected when the original patch from Kurt (including my bit) was submitted, though, so it's a bit late to complain now about aesthetics. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: