Re: 7.4.3 & 8.0.0beta1 + Solaris 9: default pg_hba.conf
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 7.4.3 & 8.0.0beta1 + Solaris 9: default pg_hba.conf |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 41237D06.8050806@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 7.4.3 & 8.0.0beta1 + Solaris 9: default pg_hba.conf breaks (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: 7.4.3 & 8.0.0beta1 + Solaris 9: default pg_hba.conf breaks
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote: >Tom Lane wrote: > > >>Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: >> >> >>>Agreed, but from a clarity perspective, are we better moving to the CIDR >>>format for hostnames in pg_hba.conf anyway? >>> >>> >>Possibly --- it'd be easier to sell on that argument anyway ;-) >> >> >> s/hostnames/netmasks/ +1 vote. They are whole lot easier to understand anyway. We already did it for the IPv6 addr, and you thought it so nice you put it in the release notes :-) >>>Also, I think we would accept a patch that modified pg_hba.conf for >>>Solaris only that made this change. >>> >>> >>That seems like the worst of all possible worlds. Difficult to do *and* >>confusing for users, since on Solaris the sample file would no longer >>match the documentation. >> >> > >True, but at least it would work. Are they saying the masks don't work >at all? Why haven't we heard this before? > > > I thought the report was that *only* 255.255.255.255 failed. The question is why? And would changing the hints passed to getaddrinfo_all improve matters (e.g. by filling in the ai_family with the value from the addr structure we already have)? cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: