New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
using postgres user for pgbouncer/pooler #892
Comments
I guess, you're using the |
the renaming got merged. To try it out use the freshly build image |
Thanks for the message I was testing stuff with the old build and running into a few issues, I'll pull the latest repo and see, if my issues persist. Update 1: The operator doesn't seem to listen to "...pooler: true" yet, but still to "...pool: true. The operator, also doesn't seem to accept my values to create 3 pgbouncers or change the resources. Update 2: switching postgres-operator tag from |
I'm running into another issue with the pooler feature. As I understand from the documentation If I only spcify If I only spcify If I specify As far as I understand from the documentation this not intended or am I understanding incorrectly? |
We forgot the reflect the renaming in our pgBouncer image 😞 . Will fix that now. The operator creates a lookup function for credentials to be used by pgBouncer. With the |
Fixed. New image is: |
Hi, I was reading about pgbouncer and just saw here that it's now supported in the operator. I'm on 1.4.0. What are the steps to use it now? Is there an estimated release date for the version that will include this? Thanks! |
@FxKu I think this issue may need to be reopened. I tried to get the latest image up and running, but I'm still running into the same issues as before. I'll append the log from the postgres-operator, maybe it will help find the solution. The logs is from the scenario, where I set From our discussion I would assume this configuration would result in the pooler using the existing I would assume, this is not the intended behaviour.
|
@haroonb when you do not specify the user (e.g. when it's commented) a new user and secret will be created and that user is called Nevertheless, the go error doesn't look good. Will have a look. Edit: I saw that you are talking about |
I tried to use postgres as schema and user, if use that setting no poolers are created. I'll append the logs of two other scenarios I ran to test this issue, I ran a lot more test, but I think these two will demonstrate the issue. I hope I could provide useful information.
|
@haroonb how does your pg manifest currently look like? Did you reflect the renaming to pooler and use Regarding the first setup, it is expected that such a secret is generated, because a new user |
You can use system users with pgbouncer. I used postgres to login with another version of pgbouncer already, so I would assume it works. These are the .yamls I used in the order configmap.yaml operator-service-account-rbac.yaml postgres-operator.yaml api-service.yaml complete-postgres-manifest.yaml
|
I could reproduce the error when using PR #906 should also cover the nil pointer you've faced. |
@FxKu Does that mean, that this won't be resolved or is working as intended? In regards to best practice, I see the point and understand it, however the application accessing the database/pooler can't distinguish between the two and currently only works with the postgres user. |
@haroonb the PR will make the operator more strict and give you a reasonable error when system users are picked for the pooler. So yes, it is intended that this doesn't work. Nevertheless, you can connect via the pooler pod/service using the |
The new image: |
Hello
I'm trying to use the new integrated pgbouncer feature and running into some trouble. The pods for the pgbouncer are not being created. As far as I can tell from the documentation the configuration files are setup correctly.
I would assume with this configuration the postgres-operator would create
{cluster-name}-pooler
like documented, but only the cluster is created.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: