| From: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Would PostgreSQL 16 native transparent data encryption support database level encryption? |
| Date: | 2023-05-18 19:45:56 |
| Message-ID: | b31d1248-7307-0b4e-38cc-2d8ff51c3b90@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 5/18/23 14:07, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2023, Ron wrote:
>
>>> Why not using multiple clusters then?
>> Yet More Firewall Rules to get approved by the Security Team. And then they
>> balk at port 5433 because they've never heard of it.
> But mixing multiple customers on one cluster is much more of a risk.
Better have your roles and pg_hba.conf entries defined correctly!
Fortunately, pg_hba.conf is pretty easy.
>> And from a technical point of view, one Postgresql system can better manage the
>> memory on a VM than two which don't know about each other.
> Probably true. Is there something with which multiple clusters running
> on the same server can communicate to do that better?
A /meta/ postmaster!!!
--
Born in Arizona, moved to Babylonia.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | FOUTE K. Jaurès | 2023-05-18 20:00:08 | PostgreSQL 13 - Logical Replication - ERROR: could not receive data from WAL stream: SSL SYSCALL error: EOF detected |
| Previous Message | Arora, Nick | 2023-05-18 19:38:55 | Re: Unrecognized Node Type Warning |