Read-only endpoints problem about pgbouncer-operator HOT 4 OPEN

https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/DPE-4071

from pgbouncer-operator.

@dragomirp can you please comment it here. IMHO, we should notify client on the endpoints change... always. Is the UNIX SOCKET pgb concept affects us here?

from pgbouncer-operator.

BTW, on the reported image the pgboucer/1 exposed port, but pgbouncer/2 didn't. why?

from pgbouncer-operator.

@dragomirp can you please comment it here. IMHO, we should notify client on the endpoints change... always. Is the UNIX SOCKET pgb concept affects us here?

When there's no external node connectivity, client units are only supposed to use the local subordinated pgbouncer. There's no place to set a read only database name in the interface and, as is, accessing those requires the client charm to be aware of the _readonly databases. To be able to have meaningful read only endpoints, we'll need to add another PGB read only instance serving on a different port, since that can be different in the interface.

With data integrator we'd have the inverse problem, if we provide real readonly endpoint (on a different port), there would be no way to get all available RW endpoints without that the client has to switch ports.

This is preexisting behaviour, since before the charm was made subordinate.

from pgbouncer-operator.