Hi,
On 2019-12-11 14:27:45 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 08:12:22AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I'm very doubtful about this. I think it's a good safety measure to
> > ensure that there's no previous state file that we're somehow
> > overwriting.
>
> During the checkpoint of replication slots, SaveSlotToPath() would
> just *LOG* any failure while leaving around the state.tmp of a slot,
> and then any follow-up attempt to create state.tmp would just fail
> because of that, preventing the slot state file from being flushed
> continuously. I think that's wrong. Concurrency is not a concern
> either here as the slot's LWLock to track an I/O in progress is taken
> in exclusive lock.
I'm not clear on what you're saying? I don't see how I'm arguing for the
type of behaviour you seem to be describing?
Greetings,
Andres Freund