At Wed, 19 Oct 2022 10:48:03 -0400, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote in
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:28 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Yeah, leaving a potentially unbounded number of files around after
> > > > system crashes seems pretty unfriendly. I'm not sure how to fix that,
> > > > exactly.
> >
> > Unbounded number of sequential crash-restarts itself is a more serious
> > problem..
(Sorry, this was just a kidding.)
> They don't have to be sequential. Garbage could accumulate over weeks,
> months, or years.
Sure. Users' archive cleanup facilities don't work if they only
handles the files that with legit WAL file names.
> Anyway, I agree we should hope that the system doesn't crash often,
> but we cannot prevent the system administrator from removing the power
> whenever they like. We can however try to reduce the number of
> database-related things that go wrong if this happens, and I think we
> should. Bharath's patch seems like it's probably a good idea, and if
> we can do better, we should.
Yeah, I don't deny this, rather agree. So, we should name temporary
files so that they are identifiable as garbage unconditionally at the
next startup. (They can be being actually active otherwise.)
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center