On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 1:19 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> We can of course support "forced" re-encryption, but I think it's acceptable > if that's fairly expensive as long as it can be throttled and executed in the > background (kinda similar to the patch to enable checksums in the background). As an alternative way to provide for a "forced" re-encryption couldn't you just run pg_dumpall + psql? Regards, -- Peter Smith Fujitsu Australia
