On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 01:56:38PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > In the interest of not being viewed as too much of a naysayer, let me > first reiterate that I am generally in favor of TDE going forward and > am not looking to throw up unnecessary obstacles in the way of making > that happen.
Rather than surprise anyone, I might as well just come out and say some things. First, I have always admitted this feature has limited usefulness. I think a non-LSN nonce adds a lot of code complexity, which adds a code and maintenance burden. It also prevents the creation of an encrypted replica from a non-encrypted primary using binary replication, which makes deployment harder. Take a feature of limited usefulness, add code complexity and deployment difficulty, and the feature becomes even less useful. For these reasons, if we decide to go in the direction of using a non-LSN nonce, I no longer plan to continue working on this feature. I would rather work on things that have a more positive impact. Maybe a non-LSN nonce is a better long-term plan, but there are too many unknowns and complexity for me to feel comfortable with it. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
