Ron Atkins wrote:
> Isn't PostgreSQL limited by not utilizing some type of name resolution?
DNS refers to address first, _then_ the name. No IP, no name, so it
works the other way around... I guess adding it might make life easier
for those adding single hosts, but since you can't add an entire range
of hosts too easily by one name, and have it map back to IP packets,
running security off of names would be much slower, as each session had
to waste time on name lookups rather than just mapping to the address.
A note on DNS: It's a user feature. It's there to make humans understand
where packets are going. It has _nothing_ to do with where they actually
go, or where they actually come from.
> Am
> I looking for a work around because name resolution has yet to be added, or
> is my question flawed?
If you are using standard internet DNS, you can't have a name without a static
IP to point that name to. So the IP comes first, name is *dependant* on IP.
-Boppers
--
Brought to you from boop!, the dual boot Linux/Win95 Compaq Presario 1625
laptop, currently running RedHat 6.1. Your bopping may vary...and winmodems
suck big smelly rocks.