Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems?
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Z364cK53dbnwnQDJ@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems? (David Steele <david@pgbackrest.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems?
Re: Fwd: Re: A new look at old NFS readdir() problems? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 01:03:05AM +0000, David Steele wrote: > > > I'm more concerned about the report we saw on SUSE/NFS [1]. If that > > > report is accurate it indicates this may not be something we can just > > > document and move on from -- unless we are willing to entirely drop > > > support for NFS. > > > [1] https://github.com/pgbackrest/pgbackrest/issues/1423 > > > > I installed an up-to-date OpenSUSE image (Leap 15.6) and it passes > > my "rmtree" test just fine with my NAS. The report you cite > > doesn't have any details on what the NFS server was, but I'd be > > inclined to guess that that server's filesystem lacked support > > for stable NFS cookies. > > The internal report we received might have had a similar cause. Sure seems > like a minefield for any user trying to figure out if their setup is > compliant, though. In many setups (especially production) a drop database is > rare. Will people now always get a clear error on failure? Crazy idea, but could we have initdb or postmaster start test this? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: