On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 02:12:46PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2020 at 05:30, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > We should create an SQL-level master key that is different from the
> > block-level master key. By using separate keys, and not deriving them
> > from a single key, they keys can be rotated and migrated to a different
> > cluster independently. For example, users might want to create a new
> > cluster with a new block-level key, but might want to copy the SQL-level
> > key from the old cluster to the new cluster. Both keys would be
> > unlocked with the same passphrase.
>
> I've updated the patch according to yesterday's meeting. As the above
> description by Bruce, the current patch have two encryption keys.
> Previously we have the master key in pg_control but due to exceeding
> the safe size limit of pg_control I moved two keys to the dedicated
> file located at global/pg_key. A wrapped key is 128 bytes and the
> total size including two wrapped key became 552 bytes while safe limit
> is 512 bytes.
>
> During pg_upgrade we copy the key file from the old cluster to the new
> cluster. Therefore we can unwrap the data that is wrapped on the old
> cluster on the new cluster.
I wonder if we should just use two files, one for each key.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
