Greetings, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:24:46AM +0200, Antonin Houska wrote: > > > I think there are several directions we can go after all-cluster > > > encryption, > > > > I think I misunderstood. What you summarize in > > > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Transparent_Data_Encryption#TODO_for_Full-Cluster_Encryption > > > > does include > > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoBjrbxvaMpTApX1cEsO=8N=nc2xVZPB0d9e-VjJ=ya...@mail.gmail.com > > > > i.e. per-tablespace keys, right? Then the collaboration should be easier > > than > > I thought. > > No, there is a single tables/indexes key and a WAL key, plus keys for > rotation. I explained why per-tablespace keys don't add much value.
Nothing in the discussion that I've seen, at least, has changed my opinion that tablespace-based keys *would* add significant value, particularly if it'd be difficult to support per-table keys. Of course, if we can get per-table keys without too much difficulty then that would be better. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
