Re: Error handling (or lack of it) in RemovePgTempFilesInDir
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Error handling (or lack of it) in RemovePgTempFilesInDir |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqRGpkpJp2UkxU04br+Ya3C+Hea0E1ocnjiLFHMaOF4zkw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Error handling (or lack of it) in RemovePgTempFilesInDir (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Error handling (or lack of it) in RemovePgTempFilesInDir
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Uh ... I'm confused? That particular change only concerns whether we emit >>> a log message, not whether the action is attempted or succeeds. > >> From the commit mentioned upthread, this switches one hard failure >> when opening pg_tblspc to a LOG report: >> @@ -3014,7 +3018,7 @@ RemovePgTempFiles(void) >> */ >> spc_dir = AllocateDir("pg_tblspc"); > >> - while ((spc_de = ReadDir(spc_dir, "pg_tblspc")) != NULL) >> + while ((spc_de = ReadDirExtended(spc_dir, "pg_tblspc", LOG)) != NULL) >> { > > That's not the same commit you just mentioned. 561885db05d3296082ce8750805b8ec322cf9aa1 refers to this thread, and I am reading this diff as part of it :) > The general theory I'm operating on is that we should endeavor to > let the database start in any situation where that doesn't involve > a data-corruption hazard. Yeah, it might not be nice if we leave > GB worth of temp files around, but is a postmaster start failure > better? I don't think so. I am getting the feeling that we are going to see people complain about those files lying around as well... That's as far as my opinion goes. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: