On 27/06/13 15:11, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> On 6/27/13 6:34 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Is there a reason why we have set the min allowed value for port to 1,
>>> not 1024? Given that you can't actually start postgres with a value of
>>> <1024, shoulnd't the entry in pg_settings reference that as well?
>>
>> Are you thinking of the restriction that you need to be root to use
>> ports <1024? That restriction is not necessarily universal. We can let
>> the kernel tell us at run time if it doesn't like our port.
>
> Yes, that's the restriction I was talking about. It's just a bit
> annoying that if you look at pg_settings.min_value it doesn't actually
> tell you the truth. But yeah, I believe Windows actually lets you use
> a lower port number, so it'd at least have to be #ifdef'ed for that if
> we wanted to change it.
There's also authbind and CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE.
Jan