From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of John Scalia Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:36 AM To: Shreeyansh dba Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [ADMIN] A local replication entry
Ok, the line now reads:
host replication postgres 127.0.0.1/32 trust
And I performed a "service postgresql-9.3 reload", and it still failed with the same error. Then, I tried again using a "-h 127.0.0.1" option for the pg_basebackup. That complained "pg_basebackup: could not connect to server: connection refused." So, I did a "netstat -an | grep 5432" and I see that postgresql is not listening on that port for 127.0.0.1.
On 10/29/2014 9:58 AM, Shreeyansh dba wrote:
I suspect there is a small modification is required in pg_hba.conf file ::
Remove the '#' and modify the line like :: 'host replication postgres 127.0.0.1/32 trust'
I think maybe it's just too early in the morning for me, but I can't seem to get a local entry for replication working. I'm trying to create a script for hourly backups using pg_basebackup, and here's the command I'm using:
And the error is: FATAL: no pg_hba.conf entry for replication connection from host "[local]", user "postgres", SSL off, but I have gotten this to work only if I use a "-h 10.10.1.129" option for the command. This only works since another entry in the pg_hba.conf satisfies the command.
Do I have an error with the local entry? Or are local entries even allowed for replication? As this has to be automatically deployed to various servers, I'd prefer to NOT specify each host's IP address both in pg_hba.conf file and in the script calling the pg_basebackup command. Oh, and at some point when this starts working, I am going to change the user from postgres to another without superuser capability. -- Jay