Re: new feature: LDAP database name resolution - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Russell Smith
Subject Re: new feature: LDAP database name resolution
Date
Msg-id 43FBC359.60306@pws.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: new feature: LDAP database name resolution  ("Albe Laurenz" <all@adv.magwien.gv.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Thanks to everybody who answered.
> 
> Maybe it is really the best thing to use a tool like postgresql-relay or
> pgpool - I will investigate these.
> I'm not eager to reinvent the wheel.
> 
> We have considered relocating DNS entries, but the problem is that a
> changed
> DNS entry takes long to propagate; in particular Windows has a caching
> problem there.

So even if you specify the TTL of the DNS records to be 60 seconds for 
the front end labels you put on your servers, Windows will not refresh 
after that period of time, even though it should?

[snip]

> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> 
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
> 
> 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: streamlined standby procedure
Next
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_config, pg_service.conf, postgresql.conf ....