Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > However, the server log messages stating an IPv6 socket was not made is
> > only printed if the binary supports IPv6.  The message seems to be a
> > compromise between those who wanted a separate IPv6 GUC/flag and those
> > who wanted it to silently fail on IPv6.
> I'm not sure.  Those who wanted silence don't get any silence and those
> who wanted a configurable hard failure get neither the configurability nor
> any failure.

That is the compromise.  Neither gets what they want, but the final
solution is closer to each.  This is probably the best we can do.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to