Re: [HACKERS] What's left?

[Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>]

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I think it will very likely rename/unlink will fail because of the file
> descriptor cache kept by each backend.

Hmm ... you're probably right.  Okay, it's a more significant issue than
I thought.

> I am attaching dir.c from the PeerDirect port.  It handles unlink
> failures by appending the failed file name to a file that is later read
> and another unlink attempted.  Perhaps this is something we can do, and
> have try unlinks after each checkpoint.

That seems like a possibility.  The open files will get closed very soon
after the delete occurs (as a byproduct of relcache flush), so we don't
need very much of a delay.  Next checkpoint sounds reasonable.

> PeerDirect handles rename by just looping.  We really can't delay a
> rename.  There is discussion in the Win32 TODO detail that goes over
> some options, I think.

Do we really have any problem with rename?  We don't rename table files.
The renames I can think of are renaming temp files into place as
permanent ones, and there would be no open references to such a file.

			regards, tom lane