couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Franck Eyraud <>
Subject Re: Bind Address
Date Sun, 08 Sep 2013 20:11:59 GMT
Hi Jason and Robert,

Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to write a patch for this so 
low level feature, and I don't even saw a line of couchdb code, yet. I 
could give hints to someone who knows very well the sockets, if needed.

I'm just a mere new (6 months) user of/developer on couchdb. I also have 
a good experience in configuring all types of server, and I was surprise 
for the first time that I couldn't choose the interfaces/ip on witch the 
server listens. (just for the record, I tried it when I realise the 
/etc/hosts file of ubuntu defines by default the machine hostname on (not so couchdb was not responding on it, and I 
wanted it to bind to both of them, but not on external addresses. So I 
looked how to define several address, and I found this old post, and 
this (open) couchdb 
ticket, saying we can't, and I wrote to say it is really a pitty.

Use case of different ports/ips can be on big servers having several 
network interfaces (or simply several IPs on one interface), and want to 
listen to two of them (e.g. one for internal, one for external traffic, 
but not all of them).

This said, I don't have a clue if this is as easy as adding a bit of 
configuration parsing and a for loop to the bind function, or if 
managing several sockets instead of one makes everything much more complex.
One may also contest that nowadays, with cloud, virtual computers, and 
the good replication system of couchdb allowing several instances for 
the same content, these situations maybe cancelled by some workaround. 
But as always, this adds complexity which would be handy (from 
user's/administrator's point of view) to avoid by just modifying a 
configuration file (or even with some PUT http request, with the server 
restarting by itself, this is a killing feature of couchdb, I admit!)

To answer Jason's question, in general, there are two ways of defining 
the bind address and port :

- two separated options, like couchdb now, but that may have multiple 
Address :;;
Port: 80 5984
Would listen to all combinations

- on single option with both
bind_address :;;;

The first option seems the easiest to do, and is still compatible with 
the actual couchdb configuration. Although, we may accept a mix of them 
: if the bind_address entry defines a port, then listen to it, and not 
on the ports list in the port option. It seems still quite easily 
understandable to whom configures it.

So your example may become :

bind_address :
port : 123 234 456

I add that although couchdb seems to be able to bind on ip6, the actual 
configuration makes it so that we can't bind to both ip4 and  ip6 at the 
same time, because this requires at least 2 bind_address entries 
( and ::). Except there is a way I didn't (I tried *, but that 
won't do it)

My two cents, hope this helps, I'm available for other input, if needed,


On 08/09/2013 15:58, Jason Smith wrote:
> Franck, how would you envision the config working for multiple IPs and
> ports to bind to?
> Currently they are two different configuration options, so I am trying to
> understand how it would work in the general case.
> For example if I want to listen to but then and
> then,, and for each of ports 123, 234, 456. For
> that scenario (which I think represents the most complex/flexible support
> Couch could conceivably offer), how would the configuration for that look
> to you?
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Franck Eyraud <>wrote:
>> Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@...> writes:
>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Cairo Noleto <caironoleto@...> wrote:
>>>> Hi, how to set bind address for a five unique IPs? ("bind_address =
>>>> --
>>>> Cairo Noleto 
>>>> Visits
>>> Cairo,
>>> You can't. If you need to have a subset of your public IP's used then
>>> you'll need to setup a proxy. CouchDB  only natively supports a single
>>> interface, with the special case that means all interfaces.
>>> I don't think it'd be out of the question to support a multiple
>>> listener sockets but no one has been motivated to create a patch so
>>> there's never really been any discussion on it.
>> Hi,
>> I think this is in fact a *very* important missing feature for couchdb to
>> be
>> accepted in big IT infrastructures, as well as bind on several ports...
>> Regards,
>> Franck Eyraud

View raw message