Re: Online checksums patch - once again

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 04:57:41PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:53 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:49:44PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 01:03:20PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > Other than bots, this patch doesn't seem to have attracted any
> reviewers
> > > > this time around.  Perhaps you need to bribe someone?  (Maybe "how
> sad
> > > > your committer SSH key stopped working" would do?)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm. I don't think that's a bribe, that's a threat. However, maybe it
> will
> > > work.
> > >
> >
> > IMHO the patch is ready to go - I think the global barrier solves the
> > issue in the previous version, and that's the only problem I'm aware of.
> > So +1 from me to go ahead and push it.
> >
> > And now please uncomment my commit SSH key again, please ;-)
>
> For adding cluster-level encryption to Postgres, the plan is to create a
> standby that has encryption enabled, then switchover to it.  Is that a
> method we support now for adding checksums to Postgres?  Do we need the
> ability to do it in-place too?
>
>
> I definitely think we need the ability to do it in-place as well, yes. 

OK, just has to ask. I think for encryption, for the first version, we
will do just replica-only changes.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +