On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Ross J. Reedstrom <reeds...@rice.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:41:37PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:15 PM, KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote: >> > If we don't need a PoC module for each new hooks, I'm not strongly >> > motivated to push it into contrib tree. >> > How about your opinion? >> >> I'd say let it go, unless someone else feels strongly about it. > > I would use this module (rate limit new connection attempts) as soon as > I could. Putting a cap on potential CPU usage on a production DB by either > a blackhat or mistake by a developer caused by a mistake in > configuration (leaving the port accessible) is definitely useful, even > in the face of max_connections. My production apps already have > their connections and seldom need new ones. They all use CPU though.
If KaiGai updates the code per previous discussion, would you be willing to take a crack at adding documentation? P.S. Your email client seems to be setting the Reply-To address to a ridiculous value. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
