Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling
Date
Msg-id 12346.1262797088@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling  (Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au> writes:
> Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>>> This was probably discussed to death earlier, but: why was it decided to
>>> not simply use a different port for listening for walsender
>>> connections?
>> 
>> I believe that using a different port would make the setup
>> of replication messier; look for the unused port number,
>> open that port for replication in the firewall, etc.

> Actually, being able to firewall walsender traffic separately might be
> rather handy.

> Having to assign a different port wouldn't be fun for packagers, though,

Well, we'd have to get a port number officially assigned by IANA.

I tend to agree that the management overhead of a second port isn't
worth it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Type modifiers for DOMAIN
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-extending table partitions?