| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questionst |
| Date: | 2002-09-20 15:50:17 |
| Message-ID: | 16739.1032537017@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I think we may be best just looping on MoveFileEx() until is succeeds.
> We do the pg_pwd writes while holding an exclusive lock on pg_shadow so
> that will guarantee that no one else will slip an old version of the
> file in after we have written it. However, it also prevents pg_shadow
> access while we are doing the looping. Yuck.
Surely you're not evaluating this on the assumption that the pg_shadow
triggers are the only places that use rename() ?
I see other places in pgstat and relcache that expect rename() to work
per Unix spec.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2002-09-20 15:52:08 | Improving speed of copy |
| Previous Message | Greg Copeland | 2002-09-20 15:44:05 | Re: Having no luck with getting pgbench to run multiple |