Yes "listen_addresses" is not commented. I did notice when I did the netstat, 
for tcp, it was all "127.0.0.1" on various ports including 5432 but I have a 
listing for tcp6 that has my static IP using port 32305. Would that make a 
difference?

Jason L. Amerson

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> 
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 01:18 PM
To: Jason L. Amerson <drja...@alphagenius.org>
Cc: 'Steve Crawford' <scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com>; 'Adrian Klaver' 
<adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>; 'PostgreSQL' <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Remote Connection Help

"Jason L. Amerson" <drja...@alphagenius.org> writes:
> I connected to PostgreSQL locally. I ran “show listen_addresses;” and it 
> returned “localhost.” I ran “show port;” and it returned “5432.” I am now 
> confused. I edited the “postgresql.conf” file and change the setting to ‘*’. 
> Then I restarted the server with “service postgresql restart.” I was in root 
> since I had to edit the config files. I thought maybe I edited the wrong 
> file, like maybe there were two in two different locations or something. I 
> ran “show confg_file;” and it returned 
> “/usr/local/psql/data/postgresql.conf.” That is the same file I edited from 
> the start. To be sure, I edited the file by using “nano 
> /usr/local/psql/data/postgresql.conf.” I went down and found that I did have 
> it as “listen_addresses = ‘*’ yet when I run “show listen_addresses”, it 
> shows “localhost.” I am confused. When I run “netstat -nlt”, the results show 
> that it is listening to “127.0.0.1:5432.”

According to what you wrote here, you did everything right, so it's something 
you failed to mention.

One thing I'm wondering is whether you removed the comment symbol (#) from the 
listen_addresses line when you edited it.  As installed, postgresql.conf is 
pretty much all comments.

You might get more insight from

select * from pg_settings where name = 'listen_addresses';

particularly the source, sourcefile, sourceline fields.

                        regards, tom lane



Reply via email to