Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope@jackdb.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.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: 2019-08-08T18:20:18Z
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
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 07:40:05PM -0400, Sehrope Sarkuni wrote: > With the provisos above, yes I think that would work though I don't think it's > a good idea. Better to start off using the functions directly and then look > into optimizing only if they're a bottleneck. As a first pass I'd break it up > as separate writes with the encryption happening at write time. If that works > fine there's no need to complicate things further. OK, sounds like a plan! -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +