On 11/02/2013 08:11 AM, Rowan Collins wrote:
> On 01/11/2013 13:58, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 11/01/2013 06:29 AM, Birta Levente wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>
>> If I am following correctly the OP chain of connections as originally
>> set up and I believe still is:
>>
>> End User --> port 8080 (Tomcat) --> port 5432 (Postgres)
>>
>> and they are trying to get to
>>
>> End User --> port 808 (Tomcat) --> port 6432 (pgBouncer) --> port 5432
>> (Postgres)
>>
>>
>
>
> That sounds right, but port 8080 is definitely irrelevant in this case,
> as it is just a detail of the application - it could just as well be a
> desktop application with no associated network port.
>
> For the sake of what needs to be configured, the chain is just:
>
> Before:
> (application using PostgreSQL) --> port 5432 (Postgres)
>
> After:
> (application using PostgreSQL) --> port 6432 (pgBouncer) --> port 5432
> (Postgres)
Well, what I showed is supposition on my part and is not necessarily the
truth. Part of the issue is discerning the truth of how information
flows through the system, in particular what exactly is/are the
application(s) talking to Postgres/pgBouncer. It is still unknown, at
least to me, where geoserver fits into the above and whether it is
connecting directly to Postgres or going through the Tomcat server. Once
some sort of schematic for connection(current, desired) is provided then
it would be possible to do as you suggest. The confusion from what I am
following is that the "(application using PostgreSQL) --> port 5432
(Postgres)" part is not known.
>
> So there are two things to configure:
>
> a) in the application, tell it to connect to port 6432 for its database
> connections, instead of port 5432
> b) in pgBouncer, make sure it can connect properly to the postgres
> server on port 5432
>
> It sounds like (b) is currently the issue.
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@gmail.com
