Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> I've not followed this thread all that closely, but I do tend to agree
> with the idea of "only try to mess with files that are *clearly* ours to
> mess with."
Well, that opens us to errors of omission, ie failing to fsync things we
should have. Maybe that's an okay risk, but personally I'd judge that
"fsync everything and ignore (some?) errors" is probably a more robust
approach over time.
regards, tom lane