From: Heikki Linnakangas on
On 09/06/10 08:24, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(a)dunslane.net> wrote:
>> There is precedent for .pgpass being a bit ambiguous. See the way
>> "localhost" is used.
>
> OK. The attached patch allows us to use "replication" in the database
> field of the .pgpass file, for the replication connection.

Thanks, committed with some rewording of the docs and comments. I hope I
made them better, not worse.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Fujii Masao on
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 09/06/10 08:24, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(a)dunslane.net>
>> �wrote:
>>>
>>> There is precedent for .pgpass being a bit ambiguous. See the way
>>> "localhost" is used.
>>
>> OK. The attached patch allows us to use "replication" in the database
>> field of the .pgpass file, for the replication connection.
>
> Thanks, committed with some rewording of the docs and comments. I hope I
> made them better, not worse.

Yep. Thank a lot.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Fujii Masao on
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 09/06/10 08:24, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(a)dunslane.net>
>> �wrote:
>>>
>>> There is precedent for .pgpass being a bit ambiguous. See the way
>>> "localhost" is used.
>>
>> OK. The attached patch allows us to use "replication" in the database
>> field of the .pgpass file, for the replication connection.
>
> Thanks, committed with some rewording of the docs and comments. I hope I
> made them better, not worse.

I could confirm that this has been committed via git log, but not find
the related post on the pgsql-committers. Is there a problem in the
mailing-list?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Magnus Hagander on
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 04:56, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> On 09/06/10 08:24, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(a)dunslane.net>
>>> �wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There is precedent for .pgpass being a bit ambiguous. See the way
>>>> "localhost" is used.
>>>
>>> OK. The attached patch allows us to use "replication" in the database
>>> field of the .pgpass file, for the replication connection.
>>
>> Thanks, committed with some rewording of the docs and comments. I hope I
>> made them better, not worse.
>
> I could confirm that this has been committed via git log, but not find
> the related post on the pgsql-committers. Is there a problem in the
> mailing-list?

The cvs server has a delivery of the email to the mailinglist server
at least, so it's not there that has the problem. However, there were
a lot of unexplained issues across multiple hub.org hosted machines
that day (and nearby, iirc), including the mailserver and the dns
servers. It was probably eaten by one of those issues.


--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers