Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> I am tempted to apply this. This is the second person who asked for
> binding to a single port. The patch looks quite complete, with doc
> changes. It appears to be a thorough job.
A cursory inspection makes it look like the socket file can be placed
_anywhere_ -- even under a chroot jail. This would make more than one
person's day, Bruce. This would allow a chrooted webserver to connect
to a postmaster outside the jail -- while not terribly appealing from a
security standpoint (as any pipe out of a jail could be exploited), it
IS appealing when you need more than one chrooted webserver (doing
virtual hosting) to connect ot a common database (for hosting-site-wide
services).
If this patch passes muster (muster pass Tom Lane's eyes), and you feel
comfortable with it, I don't see why not -- this might not be a major
feature, but it IS a nice one, IMHO.
Now, if I'm wrong about the placement of the socket, well, I'm just
wrong -- but the vhosting feature is still nice.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11