Re: Proposed patch for key managment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Proposed patch for key managment
Date
Msg-id 20201217163954.GY16415@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposed patch for key managment  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Proposed patch for key managment
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Michael Paquier (michael@paquier.xyz) wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 05:04:12PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> fallback implementation.  Finally, pgcrypto is not touched, but we
> >
> > I have a fallback implemention --- it fails?  ;-)  Did you want me to
> > include an AES implementation?
>
> No idea about this one yet.  There are no direct users of AES except
> pgcrypto in core.  One thing that would be good IMO is to properly
> split the patch of this thread into individual parts that could be
> reviewed separately using for example "git format-patch" to generate
> patch series.  What's presented is a mixed bag, so that's harder to
> look at it and consider how this stuff should work, and if there are
> pieces that should be designed better or not.

I don't think there's any need for us to implement a fallback
implementation of AES.  I'm not entirely sure we need it for hashes
but since we've already got it...

Thanks,

Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimizing the documentation
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Change seconds argument of make_*() functions to numeric