Re: storing an explicit nonce - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ants Aasma
Subject Re: storing an explicit nonce
Date
Msg-id CANwKhkOnfjzD9e64d3f3tQu5dxOpUAUGRDr0znooXf2VKYMPig@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: storing an explicit nonce  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: storing an explicit nonce  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 at 23:08, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
Yes, I would prefer we don't use the LSN.  I only mentioned it since
Ants Aasma mentioned LSN use above.

Is there a particular reason why you would prefer not to use LSN? I suggested it because in my view having a variable tweak is still better than not having it even if we deem the risks of XTS tweak reuse not important for our use case. The comment was made under the assumption that requiring wal_log_hints for encryption is acceptable.

--
Ants Aasma
Senior Database Engineer
www.cybertec-postgresql.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: storing an explicit nonce
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: storing an explicit nonce