Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 628D763372D for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 16:41:41 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64422-08 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 19:41:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.ait.ac.at (arcss01.ait.ac.at [62.218.164.126]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DED2E633503 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 16:41:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from telbiomed.at (192.168.160.1) by relay.arc.local (172.30.249.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.393.1; Tue, 4 May 2010 21:41:22 +0200 Received: from telbiomed.at ([192.168.180.13]) by telbiomed.at with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 May 2010 21:42:05 +0200 Received: from [192.168.160.58] ([192.168.160.58]) by telbiomed.at with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 4 May 2010 21:42:04 +0200 Subject: Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket? From: Peter Sabaini To: Tom Lane CC: In-Reply-To: <13335.1272987580@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <1272977816.21378.13.camel@w-ehs-psa.telbiomed.at> <13335.1272987580@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 21:41:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1273002081.2590.7.camel@w-ehs-psa.telbiomed.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 May 2010 19:42:05.0163 (UTC) FILETIME=[DFEE43B0:01CAEBC1] Received-SPF: None (S0HC.arc.local: peter.sabaini@ait.ac.at does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201005/42 X-Sequence-Number: 34515 On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 11:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Sabaini writes: > > it seems Postgres tries to send a UDP packet to a random high port to > > communicate with the statistics collector daemon. We have rather strict > > packet filter rules in place, and I'd like to make the system use a > > fixed port for this, or even better a Unix domain socket. Is this > > possible (setting a compile time or run time parameter)? > > No, the stats collector just uses whatever port bind() chooses for it. A pity. > I'd suggest backing off your ideas about how much filtering is > appropriate for local connections. Since we're running multiple database instances with different projects on one machine I'd like to isolate them as best I can. Thanks anyway... peter. > > regards, tom lane