Re: Transparent column encryption

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transparent column encryption
Date: 2022-09-21 21:37:05
Message-ID: 963aa100-7e78-3463-0645-700eaaa325f2@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

New version with some merge conflicts resolved, and I have worked to
resolve several "TODO" items that I had noted in the code.

On 13.09.22 10:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Here is an updated patch that resolves some merge conflicts; no
> functionality changes over v6.
>
> On 30.08.22 13:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Here is an updated patch.
>>
>> I mainly spent time on adding a full set of DDL commands for the keys.
>> This made the patch very bulky now, but there is not really anything
>> surprising in there.  It probably needs another check of permission
>> handling etc., but it's got everything there to try it out.  Along
>> with the DDL commands, the pg_dump side is now fully implemented.
>>
>> Secondly, I isolated the protocol changes into a protocol extension
>> with the name _pq_.column_encryption.  So by default there are no
>> protocol changes and this feature is disabled.  AFAICT, we haven't
>> actually ever used the _pq_ protocol extension mechanism, so it would
>> be good to review whether this was done here in the intended way.
>>
>> At this point, the patch is sort of feature complete, meaning it has
>> all the concepts, commands, and interfaces that I had in mind.  I have
>> a long list of things to recheck and tighten up, based on earlier
>> feedback and some things I found along the way.  But I don't currently
>> plan any more major architectural or design changes, pending
>> feedback.  (Also, the patch is now very big, so anything additional
>> might be better for a future separate patch.)

Attachment Content-Type Size
v8-0001-Transparent-column-encryption.patch text/plain 382.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-09-21 21:41:28 Re: Reducing the WAL overhead of freezing in VACUUM by deduplicating per-tuple freeze plans
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2022-09-21 21:11:36 Re: Reducing the WAL overhead of freezing in VACUUM by deduplicating per-tuple freeze plans