>> > Great. Thanks for testing, and for the fix! Well that all sounds
>> > like good news: it corrects the behaviour from 11.2, and also improves
>> > on the previous behaviour which I'd have accepted as a bug if anyone
>> > had reported it. So the next problem is that we don't have a
>> > consensus on whether this is the right approach, so I don't feel like
>> > I can commit it yet. Does any want to make another concrete proposal?
>>
>> Ok, here's the version I'm planning to push soon if there are no objections.
>> Re-adding Bruce to the thread, as I just noticed the CC list got
>> pruned at some point in this thread.
Pushed.
I also noticed that the call to sync_file_range() in file_utils.c used
by fsync_pgdata() ignores the return code, and in the 9.4 and 9.5
branches, the call in pg_flush_data() ignores the return code too.
This inconsistency should be fixed; I'll think about which direction
it should be fixed in (either we are convinced that
sync_file_range(SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE) is non-destructive of error
state or we aren't, and should handle it everywhere), and maybe start
a new -hackers thread.
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com