Re: "WIP: Data at rest encryption" patch and, PostgreSQL 11-beta3

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Toshi Harada <harada(dot)toshi(at)po(dot)ntt-tx(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "WIP: Data at rest encryption" patch and, PostgreSQL 11-beta3
Date: 2019-06-25 13:39:19
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZhMMnA9jChgTT-qgFOE3w4pt8qRnsCMKPc1m_P6E+tSw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:28 AM Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> How are the requirements here different from ssl_passphrase_command?
> Why do we need a new mechanism?

I don't think that the requirements are different, and I don't think
we need a new mechanism.

I am curious exactly how you would set up ssl_passphrase_command to
prompt interactively.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2019-06-25 13:44:20 Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-06-25 12:33:14 Re: Dead encoding conversion functions