On 2020/01/24 15:38, Arthur Zakirov wrote:
> On 2020/01/24 14:56, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 01:28:29PM +0900, Arthur Zakirov wrote:
>>> It is compiled and passes the tests. There is the documentation and
>>> it is
>>> built too without an error.
>>>
>>> It seems that consensus about the returned type was reached and I
>>> marked the
>>> patch as "Ready for Commiter".
>>
>> + fsync_fname_ext(filename, S_ISDIR(fst.st_mode), false, ERROR);
>> One comment here: should we warn better users in the docs that a fsync
>> failule will not trigger a PANIC here? Here, fsync failure on heap
>> file => ERROR => potential data corruption.
>
> Ah, true. It is possible to add couple sentences that pg_file_sync()
> doesn't depend on data_sync_retry GUC and doesn't raise a PANIC even for
> database files.
Thanks all for the review!
So, what about the attached patch?
In the patch, I added the following note to the doc.
--------------------
Note that
<xref linkend="guc-data-sync-retry"/> has no effect on this function,
and therefore a PANIC-level error will not be raised even on failure to
flush database files.
--------------------
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Advanced Platform Technology Group
Research and Development Headquarters