Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures.
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures.
Дата
Msg-id
2389.1545877849@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. (Michael Paquier)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Fix failure to check for open() or fsync() failures. Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Michael Paquier writes: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 08:35:22PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Oh, I see. Yeah, if we're ignoring errors anyway, the stat calls >> seem redundant. > For this one, I think that we could simplify as attached (this causes > open() to fail additionally because of the sync flags, but that's not > really worth worrying). Thoughts? Actually, now that I think a bit more, this isn't a good idea. We want standby_signal_file_found (resp. recovery_signal_file_found) to get set if the file exists, even if we're unable to fsync it for some reason. A counterexample to the proposed patch is that a signal file that's read-only to the server will get ignored, which it should not be. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления