On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:00 PM Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > I do want to point out, as I think I did when we discussed this but want > to be sure it's also captured here- I don't think that temporary file > access should be forced to be block-oriented when it's naturally (in > very many cases) sequential. To that point, I'm thinking that we need a > temp file access API through which various systems work that's > sequential and therefore relatively similar to the existing glibc, et > al, APIs, but by going through our own internal API (which more > consistently works with the glibc APIs and provides better error > reporting in the event of issues, etc) we can then extend it to work as > an encrypted stream instead.
Regarding this, would it use block-oriented access on the backend? I agree that we need a better API layer through which all filesystem access is routed. One of the notable weaknesses of the Cybertec patch is that it has too large a code footprint, -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
