Re: Wal receiver process listens to physical IP - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Laurenz Albe
Subject Re: Wal receiver process listens to physical IP
Date
Msg-id 1dd417aa285601172a5750354479d209500037aa.camel@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Wal receiver process listens to physical IP  (Mariya Rampurawala <Mariya.Rampurawala@veritas.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, 2020-03-20 at 11:27 +0000, Mariya Rampurawala wrote:
> I have been working on a project where I need to virtualize the postgresql standby server.
> The wal receiver process listens to the Physical IP and a random port.
> How can I configure it to listen to a VIP that the wal sender process can connect to?
> Also, Is there a way I can configure the port number for this?
> 
> $ /usr/pgsql-12/bin/postgres -V
> postgres (PostgreSQL) 12.2
> 
> postgresql.conf:
> listen_addresses = '10.209.57.17'   This is the VIP
> 
> $ ps -ef | grep post
> postgres  2945     1  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 /usr/pgsql-12/bin/postgres -D /pg_mnt/pg-12/data -h 10.209.57.17
> postgres  2946  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 postgres: logger   
> postgres  2947  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 postgres: startup   recovering 000000010000000000000007
> postgres  2952  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 postgres: checkpointer   
> postgres  2953  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 postgres: background writer   
> postgres  2954  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:00 postgres: stats collector   
> postgres  2955  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:04 postgres: walreceiver   
> 
> $ netstat -anp | grep 55656
> tcp        0      0 10.209.57.15:55656      10.209.57.16:5432       ESTABLISHED 2955/postgres: walr 
> 
> 10.209.57.15 is the physical IP
> 
> $ ps -ef | grep 2955
> postgres  2955  2945  0 05:37 ?        00:00:04 postgres: walreceiver 

The standby is *listening* on 10.209.57.17 for connections, but
the WAL receiver is not listening, it actively connects to the primary
server.  Obviously it is using the other network interface.

To change that, you would have to change the network route to the primary
server to lead through the virtual interface.
But I don't see any reason to do that.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe
-- 
Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com




pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: rob stone
Date:
Subject: Re: Could postgres12 support millions of sequences? (like 10million)
Next
From: Laurenz Albe
Date:
Subject: Re: Partition by hash formula