On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 09:58:34AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> It could be >> risky for existing callers of open() for tool maintainers, or on the >> contrary people could welcome a wrapper of open() which is >> concurrent-safe in their own tools. > > I am not sure if we can safely assume that because using these functions > would allow users to concurrently delete the files, but may be it is okay > for all the FRONTEND modules. One another alternative could be that we > define open as pgwin32_open (for WIN32) wherever we need it.
Which is what basically happens on any *nix platform, are you foreseeing anything bad here?
Nothing apparent, but I think we should try to find out why at the first place this has been made backend specific.