| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Moon, Insung" <Moon_Insung_i3(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |
| Date: | 2019-06-17 12:29:02 |
| Message-ID: | f4d296c6-1a57-1e9f-2347-7796aa7e57d7@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/17/19 8:12 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> But there's about 0% chance we'll get that in v1, of course, so we need
>> s "minimum viable product" to build on anyway.
>
> There seems like a whole lot of space between something very elaborate
> and only supporting one key.
I think this is exactly the point -- IMHO one key per tablespace is a
nice and very sensible compromise. I can imagine all kinds of more
complex things that would be "nice to have" but that gets us most of the
flexibility needed with minimal additional complexity.
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2019-06-17 12:29:44 | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |
| Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2019-06-17 12:19:30 | pg_log_fatal vs pg_log_error |