Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31780633514 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 17:09:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13782-06 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 20:09:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B509D632A05 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 17:09:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o44K9CZJ019083; Tue, 4 May 2010 16:09:12 -0400 (EDT) To: Peter Sabaini cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Statistics collector port / unix dom. socket? In-reply-to: <1273002081.2590.7.camel@w-ehs-psa.telbiomed.at> References: <1272977816.21378.13.camel@w-ehs-psa.telbiomed.at> <13335.1272987580@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1273002081.2590.7.camel@w-ehs-psa.telbiomed.at> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Sabaini message dated "Tue, 04 May 2010 21:41:21 +0200" Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:09:12 -0400 Message-ID: <19082.1273003752@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane 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: 201005/44 X-Sequence-Number: 34517 Peter Sabaini writes: > On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 11:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> 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. Since the stats collector uses pre-bound UDP sockets, it should not be possible for any interference to occur. If anything other than other processes in the same PG herd is able to send a message on that socket, it would be a kernel bug. regards, tom lane