At Wed, 26 Dec 2018 12:59:32 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in <32289.1545847172@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> > I found that in the documentation thanks to a notification
> > off-list. And after some reconfirmation, what I want to fix is
> > only a few lines of comment in pg_hba.conf.sample.
>
> > -# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all"
> > -# keyword does not match "replication". Access to replication
> > -# must be enabled in a separate record (see example below).
> > +# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all" keyword
> > +# matches all databases. The "replication" keyword matches a physical
> > +# replication connection request and it must be enabled in a separate
> > +# record (see example below)
>
> Hm, I agree that the para doesn't read very well now, but I think this
> could be improved further. How about something like
>
> # DATABASE can be "all", "sameuser", "samerole", "replication", a
> # database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "replication"
> # keyword matches replication connection requests (see example below).
> # The "all" keyword matches all database names, but not replication
> # connections.
I'm afraid that just dropping "it must be enabled in a separate
record" leads to confusion. How about adding a comment to
replication connection examples.
# Allow replication connections from localhost, by a user with the
# replication privilege. Each definition must have its own record.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center