On 2/3/17 17:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> It's weirdly inconsistent now. You need a "replication" line in
>>> pg_hba.conf to connect for logical decoding, but you can't restrict that
>>> to a specific database because the database column in pg_hba.conf is
>>> occupied by the "replication" key word.
>> Agreed. Change needed.
> That sounds really apealling indeed after thinking about its
> implications. So we would simply authorize a WAL sender sending
> "replication" to connect if the user name matches. That's in short
> check_db() in hba.c.
In
<https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/7a33990f-75b1-5a4f-e7c0-223e15b84c11@2ndquadrant.com>
patch 0006 it is proposed to no longer use the "replication" keyword in
pg_hba.conf for logical
replication and use the normal database entries instead.
However, I don't think we can reasonably get rid of the replication
keyword for physical replication. Say if you have a pg_hba.conf like
host db1 someusers ...
host db2 someusers ...
host db3 someusers ...
how would you decide access for physical replication? Since physical
replication is not to a database, you need a way to call it out
separately if your pg_hba.conf style is to enumerate databases.
What we could do to make things simpler is to include "replication" in
the "all" keyword.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
