Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sv5nj-00CPSF-Me for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 02:06:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sv5ni-00ArcL-8A for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 02:06:14 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sv5nh-00ArcC-TE for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 02:06:13 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sv5nb-001iGd-Jx for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 02:06:12 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 48U25Zf51341516; Sun, 29 Sep 2024 22:05:35 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Ron Johnson cc: Peter , "pgsql-generallists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Failing GSSAPI TCP when connecting to server In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Ron Johnson message dated "Sun, 29 Sep 2024 20:27:50 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-ID: <1341514.1727661935.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2024 22:05:35 -0400 Message-ID: <1341515.1727661935@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Ron Johnson writes: > On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 2:00 PM Peter wrote: >> My application is trying to connect the database server, and meanwhile >> tries to talk to the KDC server for a service ticket. >> A configuration problem on the machine(s) can be ruled out, > Famous last words. The TCP trace looks like the client side is timing out too quickly in the unsuccessful case. It's not clear to me how the different Discourse version would lead to the Kerberos library applying a different timeout. Still, it seems like most of the moving parts here are outside of Postgres' control --- I don't think that libpq itself has much involvement in the KDC communication. I concur with looking at the Discourse release notes and maybe asking some questions in that community. regards, tom lane