Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Ryan Lambert <ryan@rustprooflabs.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>, "Moon, Insung" <Moon_Insung_i3@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-07-10T22:04:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Revamp the WAL record format.
- 2c03216d8311 9.5.0 cited
Greetings, * Tomas Vondra (tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 04:11:21PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >On 2019-Jul-10, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > >>Uh, what if a transaction modifies page 0 and page 1 of the same table > >>--- don't those pages have the same LSN. > > > >No, because WAL being a physical change log, each page gets its own > >WAL record with its own LSN. > > > > What if you have wal_log_hints=off? AFAIK that won't change the page LSN. Alvaro suggested elsewhere that we require checksums for these, which would also force wal_log_hints to be on, and therefore the LSN would change. Thanks, Stephen