Thank you, that is good information. The SSL performance issue is important and I didn't even know to ask about it. Thanks also to Ryan.
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Neil Van Dyke <n...@neilvandyke.org> wrote: > Thomas Lynch wrote on 01/01/2015 10:32 AM: > >> >> I don't know if there is an issue that caused the package to be >> distributed with these config settings so I will go with the #:socket >> `guess approach until I have a better understanding. >> > > The Debian default settings for PG access are OK to start with, especially > if it's just a single-user workstation, and not sensitive data. If someone > is setting up a PG server or handling sensitive data, they'll definitely > want to have some understanding of what their access control settings are > in `pg_hba.conf`. A few-minute shortcut is to comment-out all the access > method lines except the one or two that you think you use, then make sure > you understand everything in that line or two. Most of the other stuff is > not relevant to most people. > > Another reason for programmers to look at `pg_hba.conf` at least once > (though this doesn't affect you right now) is performance: the file > specifies which access methods can/can't/may use SSL, and SSL can give you > awful latency on each PG request. Depending on `pg_hba.conf` settings, PG > clients might silently use SSL on some systems without the programmer > knowing it, and then programmer wonders why his/her database seems so slow. > > BTW, Ryan Culpepper, et al., did an excellent job on the Racket support > for PostgreSQL. This support is being used for some heavy and complicated > PG access by some important systems. > > Neil V. > >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
