Mark Woodward wrote: > > > > On Feb 3, 2006, at 6:47 AM, Chris Campbell wrote: > > > >> On Feb 3, 2006, at 08:05, Mark Woodward wrote: > >> > >>> Using the "/etc/hosts" file or DNS to maintain host locations for > >>> is a > >>> fairly common and well known practice, but there is no such > >>> mechanism for > >>> "ports." The problem now becomes a code issue, not a system > >>> administration > >>> issue. > >> > >> What if you assigned multiple IPs to a machine, then used ipfw (or > >> something) to forward connections to port 5432 for each IP to the > >> proper IP and port? > > > > If he had multiple ips couldn't he just make them all listen only on > > one specific ip (instead of '*') and just use the default port? > > That is a good idea, and yes it would work, as do a lot of other > scenarios, but shouldn't PostgreSQL take care of "PostgreSQL?"
PostgreSQL takes care of PostgreSQL only if it is best at doing it --- in thise case, it is not. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
