OK, weirder yet!!!!
After all this screwing around, and I think this was the first time that I did a "stop", removed the log file so I
couldeasily see the result, and then I issued a "start" on the
database, just for grins, I tried running the pg_basebackup command again. I pulled it from the shell's history and
invokedit, and. It ran without a single problem. I'm guessing
now that something was incorrect in memory somewhere, and just reloading the pg_hba.conf wasn't fixing it.
I apologize to all for not thinking to issue a restart before this moment, but now I am a little worried that this
mightbite us in production.
On 10/29/2014 12:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> John Scalia <jayknowsunix@gmail.com> writes:
>> I thought you might be correct, Tom, but I double-checked the postgresql.conf file and listen_addresses = "*". I had
forgottento look to see if netstat reported:
>> tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5432 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN
>> But even with that established, the pg_basebackup using:
>> /usr/pgsql-9.3/bin/pg_basebackup -D - -h 127.0.0.1 -Ft -z -c fast -l hourly.backup > backup_file.gz
or
>> /usr/pgsql-9.3/bin/pg_basebackup -D - -h 127.0.0.1 -U postgres -Ft -z -c fast -l hourly.backup > backup_file.gz
>> are still failing with:
>> pg_basebackup: could not connect to server: FATAL: no pg_hba.conf entry for replication connection from host
"127.0.0.1",user "postgres", SSL off
>> The line from the pg_hba.conf file currently reads:
>> host replication postgres 127.0.0.1/32 trust
>> I really don't see where the problem is, and I know I've done a reload after every change in the pg-hba.conf.
> Everything that you've said looks fine, so the problem is somewhere you're
> not looking :-(. At this point, I'd wonder if the pg_hba.conf file you're
> changing is the same one the postmaster is reading. You might try
> confirming that directly by inserting a syntactically-incorrect entry and
> seeing if the postmaster bleats about it to the postmaster log when you
> issue a reload.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
