Re: non-ipv6 vs hostnames
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: non-ipv6 vs hostnames |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABUevEwiL9jmzZjVt3sRSH7L-AL7u-c0HdZ=Noj-wKWFnrVFXA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: non-ipv6 vs hostnames (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: non-ipv6 vs hostnames
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 16:12, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> Accidentally specifying an IPv6 address in pg_hba.conf on a system >> that doesn't have ipv6 support gives the following error: > >> LOG: specifying both host name and CIDR mask is invalid: "::1/128" > >> Which is obviously wrong, because I didn't do that. Do we need to >> detect and special-case ipv6 addresses in this case? > > Doesn't really seem worth going out of our way for that. Systems with > no IPv6 support are a dying breed, and will be more so by the time 9.2 > gets deployed. Well, I got this on a win64 build. It's *supposed* to have ipv6. I wonder if it breaks on windows just because there is no ipv6 address on the machine... Unfortunately I shut the machine down and won't have time to test more right now, but I'll try to figure that out later unless beaten to it... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: