Greetings, * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 08:16:06AM +0200, Antonin Houska wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 09:01:05PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > > > > Why would it not be simpler to have the cluster_passphrase_command run > > > > > whatever command-line program it wants? If you don't want to use a > > > > > shell command, create an executable and call that. > > > > > > > > Having direct integration with a KMS would certainly be valuable, and I > > > > don't see a reason to deny users that option if someone would like to > > > > spend time implementing it- in addition to a simpler mechanism such as a > > > > passphrase command, which I believe is what was being suggested here. > > > > > > OK, I am just trying to see why we would not use the > > > cluster_passphrase_command-like interface to do that. > > > > One problem that occurs to me is that PG may need to send some sort of > > credentials to the KMS. If it runs a separate process to execute the > > command, > > it needs to pass those credentials to it. Whether it does so via parameters > > or > > environment variables, both can be seen by other users. > > Yes, that would be a good reason to use an external library, if we can't > figure out a clean API like opening a pipe into the command-line tool > and piping in the secret.
Having to install something additional to make that whole mechanism happen would also be less than ideal, imv. That includes even something as install-X and then configure passphrase_command. Our experience with archive_command shows that it really isn't a very good approach, even when everything can be passed in on a command line. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
