From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Sasasu <i(at)sasa(dot)su>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption |
Date: | 2021-10-23 16:03:36 |
Message-ID: | 20211023160336.GB22621@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 02:54:56PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Sasasu (i(at)sasa(dot)su) wrote:
> > A unified block-based I/O API sounds great. Has anyone tried to do this
> > before? It would be nice if the front-end tools could also use these API.
>
> The TDE patch from Cybertec did go down this route, but the API ended up
> being rather different which menat a lot of changes in other parts of
> the system. If we can get a block-based temporary file method that
> maintains more-or-less the same API, that'd be great, but I'm not sure
> that we can really do so and I am not entirely convinced that we should
> make the TDE effort depend on an otherwise quite independent effort of
> making all temp files usage be block based.
Uh, I thought people felt the Cybertec patch was too large and that a
unified API for temporary file I/O-encryption was a requirement. Would
a CTR-steaming-encryption API for temporary tables be easier to
implement?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-10-23 17:16:30 | Re: pg_receivewal starting position |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-10-23 15:49:44 | Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption |