public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
To: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Antonin Houska <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Sasasu <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 13:27:03 -0500
Message-ID: <Yfl7d5/[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOuzzgrp9fYTP_B4OgY89bdF+7-nFVexturcWYw6SChwva-E8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+TgmoaMHLXrxOj1HA+K=Z_qqgZUOpfdto8+QiVXsfP0ds+ojw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<18009.1638171451@antos>
<[email protected]>
<1781.1643697906@antos>
<[email protected]>
<CAOuzzgrp9fYTP_B4OgY89bdF+7-nFVexturcWYw6SChwva-E8A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 01:07:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Well, I sent an email a week ago asking if people want to advance this
> feature forward, and so far you are the only person to reply, which I
> think means there isn't enough interest in this feature to advance it.
>
> This confuses me. Clearly there’s plenty of interest, but asking on hackers in
> a deep old sub thread isn’t a terribly good way to judge that. Yet even when
> there is an active positive response, you argue that there isn’t enough.
Uh, I have been lead down the path of disinterest/confusion on this
feature enough that I am looking for positive feedback on every new step
so I don't get stuck out in front with insufficient support. Yes, only
one person replying is enough for me to say there isn't interest. I
guess I now have two. My email was short and ended with a question so I
thought the people interested in the steps I suggested would give some
kind of feedback --- I certainly try to reply to all emails on this
topic.
> In general, I agree that the items you laid out are what the next steps are.
> There are patches for some of those items already too and some of them, such as
> consolidating the temporary file access, are beneficial even without the
> potential to use them for encryption.
Great. I can update my patch for July consideration.
> Instead of again asking if people want this feature (many, many, many do), I’d
> encourage Antonin to start a new thread with the patch to do the temporary file
> access consolidation which then provides a buffered access and reduces the
> number of syscalls and work towards getting that committed, ideally as part of
> this release.
Yes, agreed.
--
Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
view thread (3+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption
In-Reply-To: <Yfl7d5/[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox