Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > [ thinks... ] Maybe we could have the postmaster generate a random > number at start and include that in both the postmaster.ports file > and its pg_ping responses. That would have a substantially lower > collision probability than PID, if the number generation process > were well designed; and it wouldn't risk exposing anything sensitive > in the ping response. Unless two postmasters could open the same server socket within a microsecond of one another, a timestamp value captured on opening the server socket seems even better than a random number. Well, I guess if someone subverted the clock it could mislead, but is that really more likely to cause a false match than a random number? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
