Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (bruce@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=YaRnw@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
