Skip to content
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

add PGHOST variable to env files so mk_postgres can use type local co… #792

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

robertdahlem
Copy link

General information

This adds an optional PGHOST variable to the .env file of mk_postgres.py

It answers my own question at the Checkmk forum.

This is useful when connecting to databases that only LISTEN on a socket and not on a TCP port. Set PGHOST to a directory where the socket .s.PGSQL.$PGPORT is located and you can use connections that are configured in pg_hba.conf as type local.

In theory you could also set PGHOST to the name of a remote host where a database resides. This might be useful in cases where you are not allowed to install a Checkmk agent on a database machine.

here is an example for monitoring a GitLab PostgreSQL instance:

postgres.sql:

DBUSER=gitlab-psql
PG_BINARY_PATH=/opt/gitlab/embedded/postgresql/14/bin/psql
INSTANCE=/etc/check_mk/gitlabhq_production.env:gitlab-psql::

gitlabhq_production.env:

PGDATABASE=gitlabhq_production
PGPORT=5432
PGHOST=/var/opt/gitlab/postgresql

Also I deleted the mentioning of export in the description of .env files. It created the false appearance that you could export environment variables to mk_postgres.py.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 17, 2025

All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅
Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.

@robertdahlem
Copy link
Author

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA or my organization already has a signed CLA.

@mo-ki mo-ki added the tracked label Feb 19, 2025
@robertdahlem
Copy link
Author

@mo-ki I see failing tests here. Do I need to change/add something?

@mo-ki
Copy link
Member

mo-ki commented Feb 20, 2025

For transparency: I so far only identified the colleague responsible for this area; I made no further assessment of this PR.

What I can say: You changed the function to return a 4-tuple instead of a 3-tuple, which means you will have to adjust the type hint in line 1218. I think it should be # type: (str) -> tuple[str, str, str | None, str] now.

@robertdahlem
Copy link
Author

What I can say: You changed the function to return a 4-tuple instead of a 3-tuple, which means you will have to adjust the type hint in line 1218. I think it should be # type: (str) -> tuple[str, str, str | None, str] now.

Done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants