On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 4:53 PM Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 09:04:32PM +0100, Kai Wagner wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 7:22 PM Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 06:33:54PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote: > > > On 2025-Oct-31, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, we have been avoiding the masquerade for years. The > question is > > > > can we continue. From the lack of discussion since April 1, > 2025, it > > > > seems the answer is yes. > > > > I think this assumption can be considered a false positive. The main > reason > > this hasn't surfaced yet is that it first takes some time to adjust, and > more > > importantly, there are the downstream forks with the necessary changes > that are > > already in use or continue to be sold. So why stop doing this? > > Keep in mind this is coming up seven months after the standard became > effective, and it is being brought up by someone from Percona, and not > from an end-user. I would have thought we would have had more end users > complaining. > > > I don't think, as stated initially, that we can continue to ignore this > any > > longer. As a project, we are losing out on a significant number of users > who > > are willing to use fully open-source solutions, but are held back due to > this > > requirement. We had numerous conversations over the last few years, > exactly > > about this fact, and people went with MySQL, Mongo, or others - not > because of > > "does this technically make sense to us as engineers, but because they > couldn't > > fulfill their internal requirements". As Laurenz already stated very > well: > > "rational arguments are missing the point". > > > > It's not news that we also tried a way of implementing it. What I would > like to > > achieve here is a group of interested people who can actually make a > call on > > how this is envisioned to work. Do we handle everything in core > directly, or do > > we make all necessary parts extensible? This approach may be more > efficient in > > We created a group several years ago, got pretty far, but ended up > stopping for reasons I stated in my blog. I am not excited about doing > this again unless there is a clear change of community opinion, which I > have not seen. We're not complaining because we need TDE sooner than later, and PGDG's opinions on TDE are well known. EDB and Percona are there to take our money... -- Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce. Don't boil me, I'm still alive. <Redacted> lobster!
