Re: Loaded footgun open_datasync on Windows

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Loaded footgun open_datasync on Windows
Date: 2018-09-14 07:31:47
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 08:43:18AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> Thanks for being interested and doing the work.

No problem. I have a sort of Windows-label stuck on me for ages, and
those random buildfarm failures are annoying with TAP tests on Windows.

> If it turns out not to break anything, would you consider backpatching?
> On the one hand it fixes a bug, on the other hand it affects all
> frontend executables...

Yeah, for this reason I would not do a backpatch. I have a very hard
time to believe that any frontend tools on Windows developed by anybody
rely on files to be opened only by a single process, still if they do
they would be surprised to see a change of behavior after a minor
update in case they rely on the concurrency limitations.

> I wonder why nobody noticed the problem in pg_test_fsync earlier.
> Is it that people running Windows care less if their storage is
> reliable?

likely so.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2018-09-14 08:31:25 Re: Code of Conduct plan
Previous Message 李海龙 2018-09-14 07:27:34 when set track_commit_timestamp on, database system abort startup