From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz]
> I see. So the only reason why this flag exists is that if a file is large
> enough so as it is split into multiple chunks, then the first unlink will
> work but not the successive ones. One chunk can be at most
> 1 million bytes, which is why it is essential for WAL segments. Instead
> of ignoring *all* errors, let's ignore only ENOENT and rename ignore_error
> to missing_ok as well.
>
> You need to update the comment in receiveFileChunks where an entry gets
> deleted with basically what I mentioned above, say:
> "If a file has been deleted on the source, remove it on the target as well.
> Note that multiple unlink() calls may happen on the same file if multiple
> data chunks are associated with it, hence ignore unconditionally anything
> missing. If this file is not a relation data file, then it has been already
> truncated when creating the file chunk list at hte previous execution of
> the filemap."
>
> Adding also a comment on top of remove_target_file to explain what
> missing_ok does would be nice to keep track of what the code should do.
Thanks for reviewing. All done.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
