At Wed, 26 Dec 2018 12:59:32 -0500, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in <32289.1545847...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes: > > I found that in the documentation thanks to a notification > > off-list. And after some reconfirmation, what I want to fix is > > only a few lines of comment in pg_hba.conf.sample. > > > -# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all" > > -# keyword does not match "replication". Access to replication > > -# must be enabled in a separate record (see example below). > > +# database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "all" keyword > > +# matches all databases. The "replication" keyword matches a physical > > +# replication connection request and it must be enabled in a separate > > +# record (see example below) > > Hm, I agree that the para doesn't read very well now, but I think this > could be improved further. How about something like > > # DATABASE can be "all", "sameuser", "samerole", "replication", a > # database name, or a comma-separated list thereof. The "replication" > # keyword matches replication connection requests (see example below). > # The "all" keyword matches all database names, but not replication > # connections.
I'm afraid that just dropping "it must be enabled in a separate record" leads to confusion. How about adding a comment to replication connection examples. # Allow replication connections from localhost, by a user with the # replication privilege. Each definition must have its own record. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center