Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sasasu <i(at)sasa(dot)su>
Subject: Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption
Date: 2022-02-01 18:36:45
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2022-02-01 13:27:03 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 01:07:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Well, I sent an email a week ago asking if people want to advance this
> > feature forward, and so far you are the only person to reply, which I
> > think means there isn't enough interest in this feature to advance it.
> >
> > This confuses me. Clearly there’s plenty of interest, but asking on hackers in
> > a deep old sub thread isn’t a terribly good way to judge that.  Yet even when
> > there is an active positive response, you argue that there isn’t enough.
> Uh, I have been lead down the path of disinterest/confusion on this
> feature enough that I am looking for positive feedback on every new step
> so I don't get stuck out in front with insufficient support. Yes, only
> one person replying is enough for me to say there isn't interest. I
> guess I now have two. My email was short and ended with a question so I
> thought the people interested in the steps I suggested would give some
> kind of feedback --- I certainly try to reply to all emails on this
> topic.

Personally I can't keep up with all threads on -hackers all the
time. Especially not long and at times very busy threads. So I agree with
Stephen that it's not saying much whether / not people react to an email deep
in a thread.

> > Instead of again asking if people want this feature (many, many, many do), I’d
> > encourage Antonin to start a new thread with the patch to do the temporary file
> > access consolidation which then provides a buffered access and reduces the
> > number of syscalls and work towards getting that committed, ideally as part of
> > this release.

I think it is quite unlikely that patches of that invasiveness can be merged
this release.


Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-02-01 19:11:32 Re: SQL/JSON: functions
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2022-02-01 18:27:03 Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption