On 12/09/2011, at 3:59 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:

> If you really meant to say "intr" there (and not "nointr") then that probably explains the partial writes.
> 
> Still, I agree with Noah and Kevin that we ought to deal more gracefully with this, i.e. resubmit after a partial read() or write(). AFAICS there's nothing to be gained by not doing that, and the increase in code complexity should be negligible. If we do that, however, I believe we might as well handle EINTR correctly, even if SA_RESTART should prevent us from ever seeing that.


Hi Florian,

You are indeed correct.  Setting nointr also resolves my issue.  I could swear I checked this, but obviously not.

It does still concern me that pgsql did not deal with this as gracefully as other software.  I hope the list will consider a patch to resolve that.

Thanks in advance,

George

In response to

• Re: Patch to improve reliability of postgresql on linux nfs at 2011-09-12 05:59:32 from Florian Pflug

Responses

• Re: Patch to improve reliability of postgresql on linux nfs at 2011-09-12 12:54:39 from Peter Eisentraut
• Re: Patch to improve reliability of postgresql on linux nfs at 2011-09-12 12:54:52 from ktm@rice.edu

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Kohei KaiGai	Date: 2011-09-12 07:41:04
	Subject: Re: [v9.2] DROP statement reworks
Previous:	From: Jun Ishiduka	Date: 2011-09-12 06:46:37
	Subject: Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby