Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets
Date
Msg-id 200801052205.21663.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets  (Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>)
Responses Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Mark Mielke wrote:
> Does the patch handle patched clients connecting to unpatched servers
> and vice versa?

Yes, it is all compatible.

> Cryptographic
> authentication and encrypted data stream cost is high compared to no
> cryptographic authentication or encrypted data streams. I don't know if
> it would impact me or not. Peter: Have you tried running a benchmark of
> localssl vs localnossl?

Good point.  I tried this

time for x in $(seq 1 1000); do       pg-install/bin/psql -c "select 1" >/dev/null
done

With ssl=off it looks about like this:

real    0m12.909s
user    0m3.712s
sys     0m3.056s

With ssl=on it looks about like this:

real    1m4.741s
user    0m26.638s
sys     0m4.328s

It has been reported that the data transmission overhead is much less than the 
connection establishing overhead, which is measured here.  But this is 
certainly not an encouraging measurement, if we want to put this close to the 
default path of use.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram"
Date:
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps
Next
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps