* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001010 18:36] wrote: > I am tempted to apply this. This is the second person who asked for > binding to a single port. The patch looks quite complete, with doc > changes. It appears to be a thorough job. > > Any objections? I know several other people were struggling with having multiple instances of postgresql running on a box, especially keeping the unix domain pipe hidden, this looks like a great thing to add. -Alfred
- [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting supp... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... Alfred Perlstein
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual... Bruce Momjian
- [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hosting... David J. MacKenzie
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL vir... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual hos... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] PostgreSQL virtual... Bruce Momjian