| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgwin32_open returning EINVAL |
| Date: | 2007-12-16 02:28:15 |
| Message-ID: | 87fxy3qsow.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>
>>> Note that their behavior on finding SHARING_VIOLATION or LOCK_VIOLATION
>>> is to retry forever until the error goes away, on the theory that the
>>> antivirus/backup software will soon release the file.
>>
>> Interesting. Maybe forever is going a bit too far, but retrying for <n>
>> seconds or so.
I think looping forever is the right thing. Having a fixed timeout just means
Postgres will break sometimes instead of all the time. And it introduces
non-deterministic behaviour too.
You could print a warning after 30s but then I think you have to keep trying
forever. Just like database operations hang forever waiting for a lock.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ivo nascimento | 2007-12-16 02:49:59 | stored procedures to webservices |
| Previous Message | Trent Shipley | 2007-12-16 00:59:20 | Re: VLDB Features |