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: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.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: 2019-07-25T19:41:05Z
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, * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote: > After talking to Joe Conway, I just want to mention that if we decide > that the LSN is unique among heap and index, or among heap or index, we > will need to make sure future WAL records retain this uniqueness. One thing comes to mind regarding this and I'll admit that I don't quite remember exactly off-hand but I also don't want to not mention it now and forget to later. What about pg_upgrade? Thanks, Stephen